This point cannot be overemphasised. For most directories, referees are a key part of their methodology. This is because, speaking to referees gives the directories the most possibility of receiving unbiased feedback about the firm, and its all-round service that goes beyond the substance of the work itself. For Chambers, referee response can contribute to roughly 55% of the research methodology. Therefore, to think that referees are not important or to not pay attention to them can be a costly mistake. 

Availability trumps popularity 

In choosing referees for a research cycle, it is important to consider who is available and will have the time to speak to the researchers or complete the survey forms. The referee does not have to be the CEO or COO of the client’s company. It is enough to have an integral member of the team, who may not be as popular or senior on the team but has the time and knowledge to provide the feedback and information needed for the research process. 

Familiarity over seniority 

This point flows from point 2 above. The chosen referee should be a person familiar with the team of lawyers and the advice provided to the client in the past year. Ideally, the referee should be the person that has liaised with the firm and lawyers on the matters, who is able to describe the work sufficiently, mention the names of the lawyers active on the matter and what the roles of each lawyer was on the matter. The closer you get to choosing a referee to meet all of these requirements, the better. Similarly, the referee should be the person that has worked with the team recently (preferably in the past year) to ensure that their feedback is relevant to the research, and they also have fresh remembrance of the team of lawyers and their roles on the matter. The referees should also be a good mix of existing and new clients. Existing clients already know how the team works, would most likely be more familiar with the team members and may be more comfortable speaking about the team. Including new clients helps to add some diversity to the referee list and to ensure that the same list of names are not recycled year after year. 

Prior notice is key 

No one enjoys being barged with multiple emails about some research that they know nothing about. It is important to inform referees in advance or at the start of research so that they can expect to receive the emails from researchers and attend to them. Even if the referee is familiar with the directory and has been part of the research in past years, there is no harm in informing them that they will be contacted again, this time for the research.  

Remember to follow up 

It is not enough to inform the referee that they will be contacted, it is helpful that firms follow up with their referees to find out if they got the researchers’ emails and if they have provided feedback. By now, spam filters, firewall blocks should sound familiar as they almost always happen with some referees when they are contacted. Following up helps to know if there are such issues and helps to ensure that they get sorted on time. If the firm has subscribed to tools like the Chambers Referee Management Tool, it will be helpful to maximise the use of these tools to track the status of the referee feedback rates. There are times when it may be helpful to also follow up with researchers about referees, as researchers are busy, it is important to not overdo the follow up process. For our thoughts on the best approach to following up with referees and researchers, see here.

Always remember, written feedback is possible

Rather than not providing any feedback at all, you can encourage your busy referees to provide written feedback to the directories. Most directories provide surveys to referees, even where they request calls, they will most likely accommodate written feedback via surveys, questionnaires and even emails. Encourage your clients to explore this option where their schedule does not permit getting on calls within the timeframe of the research. 

Guidelines matter 

It is typical of directories to state the maximum number of referees that they want each firm to put forward for each practice area. It is important to comply with this instruction by ensuring that enough referees are put forward and that extras are not too much. Also, where, as with Chambers and Partners, there are specific instructions as to the number of referees each referring partner can put forward, it is important to comply with such instructions. This is to ensure that all referees are contacted for the purpose of the research, and some are not left out simply because some partners put forward more names than they should. 

Non-client referees

It is worthy of note that referees can be other people apart from clients. They can include lawyers on the same side (not at your firm), or on the other side of deals, third parties such as professionals advising on the same deals like accountants, tax advisers, etc., arbitrators, barristers, and so on. In deciding to put forward any non-client referee, it is important to inform them in advance and pay attention to their availability, familiarity with the matter and the team at the firm and other necessary points mentioned above. 

Running out of time? Your referee list can help out 

If you are ever running out of time with the submissions and research is about to start, uploading the referee list in the meantime helps to save the day. While you ask for that extension or try to get the submission done as quickly as possible, the uploaded referee list gives the researchers something to work with and they can contact referees already while awaiting the submission. 

Next time you are preparing a referee list for the purpose of a directory research, consider all the points above and see how helpful those referee comments can be for achieving your ranking goals. 

The post Referee Management 101 – For Chambers and other Directories (Tips from an ex-senior researcher at Chambers) appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Ranking Statistics: Key Figures Across Jurisdictions

Spain demonstrated an 8% increase in ranked departments, bringing the total to 684. The rankings expanded to include 11 new firms, with 1,539 individual lawyer rankings, including 63 star associates. Additionally, there was a notable 9% rise in junior partners ranked, bringing the count of up-and-comers to 85.

Romania increased to 134 department rankings and 246 lawyer rankings. The country now leads Europe in female lawyer representation, with 53% of its ranked lawyers being women.

The Benelux region saw department rankings rise from 720 to 778, and the number of ranked firms grew from 188 to 200. Austria’s department rankings expanded from 228 to 253, while Switzerland’s rankings increased from 209 to 223.

Competition law rankings saw slight growth, with 649 submissions, 445 departments across 298 firms, and 877 ranked lawyers, including 83 new individuals entering the rankings.

Spain and Romania: Market Growth and Notable Developments

Key market trends in Spain include growing interest from Latin American investors, evolving regulatory developments, and Barcelona’s rise as a technology hub, although Madrid remains the country’s dominant legal market. Significant structural updates to the rankings were also introduced, including the separation of arbitration and litigation tables in dispute resolution, the launch of the first-ever ESG rankings table, and the opening of submissions for a new transportation table.

Romania’s legal market has seen notable expansion in corporate M&A, competition law, and dispute resolution, reinforcing its growing regional influence.

Benelux, Austria, and Switzerland: Regional Market Shifts

In the Netherlands, standalone tables for arbitration and litigation were introduced, while mass torts emerged as a significant trend, highlighting the increasing prominence of collective actions. ESG litigation, particularly greenwashing claims, is gaining traction in the Dutch market.

Belgium, despite some uncertainty linked to political changes, remains relatively stable. In Austria, the introduction of a new TMT Data Protection section reflects a growing area of legal focus. However, Austria’s market has been affected by the insolvency of Signa, signaling deeper economic concerns. Luxembourg’s real estate sector faced challenges, although fund financing and fund litigation experienced growth.

Switzerland reflects cautious optimism in its transactional market despite underlying concerns. The country also saw the introduction of a dedicated Sports table.

Competition Law Trends: Evolving Legal Challenges

Competition law remains a dynamic area, with significant growth in contentious competition-related work, particularly follow-on damages claims. The enforcement of the Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) regime and foreign subsidies regulation is gaining prominence, with potential shifts expected depending on the outcome of the U.S. presidential election.

The EU’s Digital Markets Act enforcement is a key area to monitor, while ESG-related competition work remains limited, except for cases linked to greenwashing. The food and retail sectors are seeing an increase in competition investigations due to the ongoing cost-of-living crisis. Additionally, ‘no-poach’ agreements are becoming an increasingly relevant topic for competition law specialists.

Upcoming Webinars and Further Engagement

To assist firms in navigating the evolving research landscape, Chambers will host the following upcoming webinars:

• Europe Research Webinar – Hosted by Thomas Morton Green on April 8, 2025.
• Spain Research Webinar – Hosted by Camilla Russo on April 10, 2025.

The post Chambers Europe Guide 2025: Key Insights from the Launch Webinar appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

The post Webinar Invitation: Chambers RMT – Everything You Need to Know appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

1. Core Elements of a Strong Submission

• Work Highlights: Submissions should include detailed and significant matters from the past 12 months. Focus on innovation, complexity, and relevance to the market.
• Referee Feedback: Chambers places significant weight on feedback from clients and peers. Ensure referees can speak to your technical expertise, client service, and cross-border capabilities where applicable.

2. Submission Strategy: Tailor for Impact

• Prioritize Quality Over Quantity: For jurisdictions or heavily subscribed categories, focus on your firm’s most impressive highlights. However, aim to include the maximum number of matters (20) to demonstrate the depth of your practice.
• Referee Management: Submit all referees at the earliest deadline to streamline contact and avoid the “three-month rule,” which may limit repeated outreach.
• Adapt for Practice Areas: While the core submission principles are consistent across Chambers guides, adjust for jurisdictional nuances, such as the UK’s granular practice area categories versus broader global listings.

3. Optimizing Lawyer and Firm Presentation

• Bios: Highlight key achievements and a snapshot of recent, impactful work. Use concise, specific examples and avoid overly generic descriptions.
• About Us Section: Focus on what makes your team unique—industry expertise, generational depth, or specific standout capabilities. Avoid generic claims and ensure clarity.
• Feedback Section: Provide objective insights into market dynamics, competitor comparisons, and your firm’s positioning to strengthen your case.

4. Refining Matters for Submissions

• Grouping Matters: Combine related cases (e.g., similar transactions for the same client) but avoid overloading a single highlight with disparate elements.
• Cross-Practice Submissions: It’s acceptable to use the same highlight across different practice areas, but tailor the narrative to emphasize the relevant aspects for each area.

5. Interactions with Chambers Researchers

• Interviews: Partner interviews are an opportunity to provide clarity on niche practice areas or unique strengths but will not directly influence rankings. Prepare to use this time effectively.
• Market Feedback: Researchers also gather insights from peers in the market, which may influence their understanding of your firm’s standing.

6. Practical Tips for Success

• Stay On Time: While missing deadlines won’t automatically penalize you, late submissions may result in less thorough review.
• Include All Relevant Team Members: Acknowledge all contributors to a matter, even from other practice areas, but clarify their roles to avoid confusion.
• Use Data Effectively: Highlight deal values in transactional practices, but emphasize innovation and complexity in non-transactional areas.

Conclusion

Chambers submissions are both an art and a science, requiring a blend of strategy, precision, and storytelling. By focusing on your firm’s unique strengths, carefully managing referees, and adhering to submission best practices, you can enhance your rankings and visibility in this competitive landscape.

For additional support or tailored advice, feel free to reach out to Tier One Rankings for expert guidance. Stay tuned for more webinars and resources to help your firm excel!

The post Chambers Success Strategies: Key Insights from the Webinar Q&A appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Recognizing these hurdles, Chambers has introduced a new opportunity tailored specifically for SME-focused firms – the SME-focused Firms section. 

This innovative section offers a streamlined submission process that focuses more on a firm’s client base rather than individual work highlights. Notably, Chambers is not requiring client referees for this category this year.

This category is designed to provide a platform for firms that may not have the same resources as larger competitors but have a roster of satisfied clients whom they support on a variety of issues, including corporate matters, disputes, financing, restructuring, and tax.

Unlike traditional submissions, which typically require 20 unique work highlights, the SME-focused Firms section requests firms to describe their relationships with ten key clients they regularly work with. This approach aims to provide a comprehensive picture of the firm’s practice while reducing the burden of compiling extensive documentation.

Open to firms across the UK, including Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, it is nonetheless important to note that firms with three or more department rankings in Chambers UK are not eligible for this category.

If your firm fits the criteria and would like to apply, submissions are open until April 17th. 

For more information and access to the submission template, please visit: https://chambers.com/topics/showcasing-smaller-law-firms-across-the-uk

The post Introducing Chambers UK’s New Opportunity for SME-focused Law Firms appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

From the Lawyers’ Perspective: Lawyers approach directory submissions with a desire to showcase their prowess comprehensively. This often involves delving into complex case specifics and legal nuances, utilizing elaborate legal terminology to underscore their accomplishments. The aim is to present a detailed and comprehensive picture of their expertise.

The Researchers’ Viewpoint: On the other side of the spectrum, researchers tasked with evaluating these submissions seek clarity, impact, and contextual narratives. They prioritize concise, results-oriented descriptions that effectively communicate key achievements, highlight the significance of cases, and emphasize the value delivered to clients. Researchers look for information that is not only informative but also digestible and to the point.

Bridging the Gap: The challenge lies in finding a middle ground that satisfies both parties. To create impactful submissions, lawyers should focus on emphasizing outcomes, client impact, and succinct case studies. This involves striking a delicate balance between providing essential details and presenting content in a reader-friendly manner that resonates with researchers.

Know Your Audience: It’s crucial for lawyers to keep in mind that researchers handle a substantial volume of submissions during each cycle. Therefore, clarity and brevity significantly aid their review process. Crafting submissions that are clear, concise, and directly relevant to the criteria set by the directories not only expedites the review process but also bolsters the chances of being recognized.

In conclusion, aligning lawyers’ aspirations with researchers’ needs in legal directory submissions involves understanding the importance of clear communication and the significance of presenting information in a format that is both informative and easily digestible. By recognizing and addressing these needs, legal professionals can enhance the effectiveness of their submissions and maximize their visibility within the legal community.

The post Legal Directory Submissions: What Lawyers Want vs. What Researchers Need appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

• Written submissions are vital. It is the main source of information about the team and its work, providing context by telling the researcher exactly what the firm is doing. This can help to make client and peer feedback much more meaningful.
  
• In the “About Us” section (often at the beginning of the document), you must introduce the researcher to the firm and its strengths with the use of hard facts and statistics. Do not use this box to express views on the previous rankings – that will come later on!
  
• The matters you put forward make up the bulk of the submission. What is complex will depend mostly on context and the broader market will have an opinion on this too. My advice here is to think about cross-border elements, innovative structures, new legislation, impressive deal values, etc.
  
• Mastering the matter descriptions is crucial. Aim to break them up into two main sections: the first should explain who the client is and what you are doing for them, while the second dives into the uniqueness and complexity of the case (i.e. what sets it apart from routine work).
  
• Do not, however, get too carried away with the descriptions. Make sure the matters are not too long – aim to strike the perfect balance between detail and compactness. And avoid using marketing speech!
  
• There is no need for more than 20 matters – too much can serve to create a less focused submission. You should be including up-to-date matters that encompass a wide range of sectors, where possible.
  
• Aim to provide matters led by various individuals – but be selective here: those you wish to have added/promoted in the rankings should be leading a good chunk of the matters put forward. I’d also recommended mentioning desired promotees/additions in the shop window – it’s the first section researchers will read and thus will be sowed into their minds as they read on.
   
• The size of the team is important, of course, but do not be tempted to drive up the numbers for the sake of filling in boxes – the numbers put forward should be reflected in the matters.

The post Unlocking Success: Tips from a Former Legal 500 Researcher appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

The post LEGAL 500 EMEA 2024 – All you need to know in a nutshell appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Over 1 billion people from across the globe watched a dramatic final that saw Argentina pick up the FIFA World Cup trophy for the first time since 1986. As the memes and plaudits go viral, there are poignant and valuable management and business lessons to be taken away from a World Cup that saw underdogs Morocco progress to the semi-finals, gave Saudi Arabia the shock victory over the eventual champions in the first group match, and highlighted the humility and values of some of the world’s most decorated stars. 

(1) Law firms that we work with often take pride in showcasing their strength in numbers, where the key lesson is the importance of teamwork. No successful firm can make it to the very top of the game as a one-man/woman show. The synergy of individuals transparently working together for a common cause is paramount to organic growth and meeting goals. Strong and clear internal communication and sharing of data and content is as key as it is for soccer teams. Messi instinctively knows where his teammates are because they share that information. 

(2) A continually evolving strategy, the ability to learn from mistakes, and being persistent is another key takeaway from the World Cup. Despite the surprising defeat in their opening game and throwing 2-0 leads away against Netherlands and France, Argentina embraced any necessary changes, knew their strengths, stuck to and adapted their strategy to do what they needed to do. 

(3) Finally, the impact of training and developing young talent is vital. Messi’s achievements did not happen yesterday. Over 20 years, he has developed the technical nous, scoring instinct, and creative flair to become one of the all-time greats. Empowering today’s talent by helping to develop, train, and nurture them professionally ultimately gives them and the team the greatest chance of success. 

The most valuable lesson of them all for law firms, and for business too.

The post What law firms can learn from the World Cup appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Please find below questions and answers which will help you improve your upcoming Legal 500 submissions:

How important is the submission in the process? 

The submission is the most important part of the process and the main source of information for the Legal 500 researchers when they make their assessment of the firm, including ranking decisions. A strong submission is therefore an important factor in any upwards movement in the rankings. A strong submission is a clear one with highlights described clearly and concisely, avoid legal jargon. A strong submission is also one where the strengths and breadth of expertise of the practice are identified clearly and then substantiated by work highlights.

Legal 500 asks for 20 matters. We can do that, but do we get penalised for more than 20 matters?

Legal 500 asks that law firms stick to the number of work highlight limit. Firms that go beyond this are adding to the researchers’ workloads, and therefore likely annoying them somewhat, while also diluting the value of the highlights they provide. Listing more than 20 highlights simply makes it look like a firm listed all of the work it has done recently rather than a representative sample.

You are looking for matters from the last calendar year. Can we also show track record beyond that?

The track record of a firm is a key factor in Legal 500’s ranking decision-making process. They analyse past submissions to ascertain this, however firms are also free to briefly detail their track record in a given area as part of their most recent submission for this area. Please, as always, keep this information clear and concise, it should not take the form of additional detailed work highlights. One good way to showcase track record in an area is to list longstanding client relationships.

Obviously, firms do all they can to meet the deadlines, do you get penalised if we fail to meet the deadline?

With regards to submissions, extensions are generally possible and are given at the discretion of the researcher. If you think you will need one, let us know as soon as possible and we will do our best to accommodate this with Legal 500. 

With regards to referees, the deadline is a hard deadline and there are penalties for missing it. Referees submitted up to two weeks after the deadline will only be contacted if they are listed as a referee for just the one firm, this is because we do not want to contact the same referee twice in short succession and so if a firm submits a referee up to two weeks late and that referee was also listed by a firm that submitted on time, we will only contact the referee on behalf of the firm that submitted on time. 

Referees submitted more than two weeks after the deadline will generally not be contacted at all.

What is the most important thing to convey to Legal 500? 
Number one tip – remember, the Legal 500 is a qualitative analysis of a law firm’s work, it is therefore crucial to communicate clearly in the submissions the complexity and profile of the work done in each practice area.

Client Referees: Are they important? How many should we write down?

Client referees are an integral part of the research, though not mandatory. A firm will not be excluded from a ranking on the basis that referees have not been provided, according to The Legal 500, however feedback – from clients, introducers/referrers of work, and other third parties – is an important element of the information considered by the editorial researchers in assessing rankings and writing accompanying editorial. The average response rate, of referees, is 25 percent and each individual who wants to be considered for the individual tables needs 3-4 referee validations, thus is it advised to submit over 20 referees (there is no limit).

Client Referees: Who make the most useful client referees for you?

Those referees that actually take the time to answer our questions and clearly know the lawyers well, we do not look necessarily at who is answering but rather at what it is they are saying. A good overview spelling out REFEREE:

1.      Responsive – Are your clients responsive to phone calls and emails? Do they check spam? Will they find the time during the research period to respond? When they do reply, will they be descriptive about the team – in terms of its technical knowledge, as well as its service?

2.      Ensure – Ensure that you can use these clients as a referee. Don’t assume. Remember that they can get asked a lot, not only by yourselves but by other law firms and third parties. Also, they may have a company policy against providing references. Choose wisely.

3.      Fatigue – To avoid referee fatigue, cut and paste the referee names, companies, positions and practice areas from all the final referee spreadsheets into one master spreadsheet for IFLR, Chambers and Legal 500, and others. This will allow you to sort, filter and plan for ‘referee fatigue,’ in advance of any deadlines, and ensure that directories receive new referees.

4.      Establish – Establish which clients have worked with you over the last 12 to 18 months so they can genuinely comment on a recent experience. They are likely to be more descriptive and it will be easier to remember the wider team too, which is a key factor in firm rankings. Are the chosen clients involved in the deals listed in the submissions? Ideally so. Are the chosen clients involved for many other law firms in this area? Think carefully.

5.      Right – Using the right referee spreadsheet is easily overlooked. The directories can look similar but ensure that all the relevant information is added. To save time, you can leave the address columns out and focus on the most relevant contact information.

6.      Examine Everyone – Examine each and every referee to make sure that you don’t put more than two referees next to each company. It can annoy the client if there are too many colleagues being emailed or called. It can also highlight “shortcomings” to the researcher and also take up a valuable spot on the referee spreadsheet, which, ideally and practically, should contain no more than 20 referees, depending on the directory.

Do all clients get contacted?

Yes, Legal 500 has no limit on the amount of client referees that can be provided, although they have to be recent clients (about 18 months since the last interaction at most), and all are contacted. A good aim is NO more than 20. 

If more than one firm sends the same referee, will he or she be contacted once or more? if once, on behalf of which firm?

In cases where more than one firm has submitted, on time, the same referee, then that referee will be contacted once on behalf of all firms. They do not want to hassle your clients with multiple emails, therefore in the vast majority of cases referees will get a single email on behalf of all the firms that put this referee forward.

Will an interview help me climb in the rankings?

In short, no. While we aim to interview as many firms as possible, it is impossible for us to interview every submitting firm and it would therefore be unfair to have interviews affect ranking decisions. We therefore use interviews to complement a submission and emphasise as well as clarify the key points contained therein. They also allow us to establish market trends which we then independently verify.

The post Legal 500 Preparing for the 2023 EMEA Submissions appeared first on Tier One Rankings.