On 28th April, we conducted a webinar regarding the internal ranking process at Chambers & Partners. The webinar was hosted by Blessing Adeagbo and Lena Martin, moderated by Laurence Mussett, and featured guest speaker Ana Licurci, Research Manager at Chambers & Partners.

We were delighted to see such a high level of attendance. Thank you again to everyone who joined us! As always, to ensure no one misses out, we’ve put together the key takeaways from the session.

Who This Article Is For

• Law firm marketing and business development teams
• Partners preparing Chambers submissions
• Firms aiming to improve or secure Chambers rankings

Quick Overview

The webinar began with an overview of Chambers’ submission process, including important 2026 deadlines, key ranking components, and what firms need to know to succeed. This was followed by a focused session on how to write compelling work highlights and what strong client feedback looks like, along with additional practical tips. 

We concluded with a live Q&A session and we were very excited to receive an overwhelming number of questions. For those that we were not able to answer in the session, we have given our responses to the remaining queries at the end of this article.

Upcoming 2026 dates

Understanding the Chambers & Partners Research Process

Chambers & Partners research is structured in 5 key phases, which the researcher will have to go through each time they are researching a practice area. 

1. Preparation – Researchers meet with ranking editors to discuss market trends, recent developments, and objectives for the upcoming research (table refinement, new subtables, etc.).
2. Interviews – Researchers speak with lawyers and clients to collect feedback via calls or surveys.
3. Ranking – All the information gathered is analysed by the researcher, including submission as well as feedback from peers and clients.
4. Editorial – The researcher will select quotes from clients, and matter examples and will check that the description of the firm/lawyer is still accurate. 
5. Publication – After internal review, guides are published.

Tips: 

• Submissions are assessed annually, so consistency in both performance and participation is essential. 
• Submit referees on time to ensure they are contacted when the research starts. Be sure to send them your own reminders as this vastly improves the chance that they will respond.
• Make sure the lawyers are available to the researcher for calls

Key Criteria Behind Chambers Rankings

Chambers rankings are based on four key factors: 

1. Work highlights: The researcher will assess the sophistication of the matters submitting using the submission.
   → What does sophistication actually entail? This term refers to the complexity, scale, or strategic importance of your work. Factors include:

• The prominence of the client or transaction in the market
• Legal or jurisdictional complexities involved
• Novel issues handled, or innovative approaches
• The firm’s specific role and impact on the outcome

Note: Matters don’t have simply to be the highest-value deals; complex regulatory or cross-border work can be equally impressive, as are those that are very unusual or set precedent. Those factors really depend on the practice area. 

2. Referee feedback: What your referees say about you in surveys or interviews. Strong client feedback can have a significant impact on rankings, particularly when a researcher is undecided about a potential promotion.
3. Bench strength (for firms) and individual involvement (for lawyers): The researcher assesses the depth and quality of the team, or how actively a lawyer contributes to matters. 
4. Finally, market feedback: What peers say about a lawyer or a firm. It has the least weight but can still influence decisions if consistently positive or negative.

Tips: 

• Write matters clearly, concisely, and easy to understand (max. 1 page)
• Focus on quality: the submission allows for 20 matters, so be sure to focus on your strongest work.
• Showcase new work where possible and add clear updates if using matters that have appeared recently.
• Complete as many fields as possible where feasible for confidential matters and only use N/A when strictly necessary
• Include lawyers from other departments where relevant to help show your bench strength, especially for co-led or cross-practice matters.

How to Write Strong Work Highlights for Chambers Submissions

A well-structured matter description helps researchers quickly understand the importance of your work.

We recommend the following structure:

1. The client is identified clearly and concisely. Don’t assume the researcher knows every market player— adding brief context helps them understand both the matter and its significance.
2. The transaction is clearly explained and outlines the firm’s role and key responsibilities (current and ongoing). 
3. The firm highlights why the deal is complex, impactful, or significant—making clear why it deserves inclusion. This is crucial, as excessive or overly technical detail can obscure what the matter’s impact was.
4. A closing sentence highlighting why the matter shows the firm’s strengths. This can help underscore the strength of the deal. 

Tips: 

• Keep work highlights concise and impactful, ideally within one page per matter. 
• It’s also fine to include confidential matters: Chambers handles all data with care, and confidentiality does not make a matter any less strong or valuable.

What about matter values? 

Matter value is not always decisive, but it can provide useful context. Below are some tips:

• Use the correct value: Showcase the matter/transaction value, not the enterprise value.
• Value is a good indicator, but it isn’t everything: Don’t exclude matters just because the value is lower—complexity, jurisdictional challenges, or client importance can make them equally significant.
• Highlight broader complexity: Emphasise what makes the matter notable beyond value (e.g. legal difficulty, strategic importance, timing).
• Include values where possible: It’s better to include a matter than omit it, as each adds to the overall picture.
• Handle confidentiality smartly: If exact figures are sensitive, provide a value range instead.
• Consider practice area differences: In areas like disputes, value may matter less, but including it where possible still helps give context.

How to Secure Strong Referee Feedback for Chambers

Referee feedback is one of the most influential ranking factors, often carrying even more weight than work highlights.

Tips:

• Choose referees who are responsive and available, not just the most senior.
• Prepare them by explaining Chambers’ role and expectations, so they don’t mistake outreach for spam.
• Encourage written responses if calls aren’t possible. Feedback in any form counts.
• Spread referees strategically, so that newer partners receive exposure and are well positioned for consideration too. 
• Never “coach” referees, but ensure they understand what Chambers is looking for. The main themes to their feedback should be the firm’s quality of advice, commercial awareness, and sophistication of service. 

Consistent, positive feedback over multiple cycles signals reliability and will therefore lead to new or improved rankings.

Demonstrating Bench Strength in Chambers Submissions

Chambers looks beyond individual partners.

To demonstrate strength:

• Include a range of lawyers across seniority levels
• Highlight collaboration across teams and jurisdictions
• Show continuity and depth within your practice

Consistency in Chambers Submissions Matters

Skipping a year or submitting partial information can negatively affect rankings. Chambers really values steady participation and evidence of ongoing excellence — not sporadic peaks.
If a ranked lawyer isn’t included in a submission, Chambers will monitor their performance the following year before making any ranking changes.

Final Thoughts

To stand out in your submissions to Chambers going forward:

• Submit every year
• Keep matters current (12-15 months max.), clear and easy to understand
• Make sure you explain why the matter is important/complex/challenging etc. 
• Prioritise available and willing referees above all others.

Remaining Q&A questions: 

1. I have observed through the last years that Chambers send the questionnaires to selected referees – not all. Does it go in stages or just a part of all referees provided by a law firm?

Usually, referees are contacted around the same time, whether for calls or surveys. However, in larger sections, outreach may be staggered.

The split between survey and call invitations can vary. Typically, call invites are sent to referees with a higher number of referrals, while surveys go to the rest. Some sections may follow a 50/50 split, but this is flexible. 

It is at the researcher’s discretion who they invite to calls, but ultimately Chambers will try to speak to as many referees via phone interview as possible.

2. What if a matter is very sensitive and barely any information can be shared?

If you already have enough strong matters, it may not be necessary to include it. However, if the client is notable, you can still list them in the confidential client section (Section E0) to demonstrate that you act for them.

You’re always welcome to include clients in the confidential section—Chambers treats this information seriously, and confidentiality does not weaken the strength of your submission.

Consider whether you have enough disclosable information to give the researcher a fair impression of what the matter was and why it was important. If you do not have enough information, you may wish to consider including other matters.

3. I would like to understand how we should reflect a situation where we handle multiple engagements for a single client — for example, an ongoing general advisory mandate alongside a new, distinct matter. Should these be listed as separate entries within the same client reference, or is there a preferred format for combining them into one submission?

We usually recommend listing all the deals you’ve handled for a single client under one matter description, but it’s important to clearly distinguish between different engagements—for example, ongoing advisory work versus a specific litigation matter. This approach also helps free up space to highlight work for other clients.

4. I had the benefit of going through a survey with a lawyer and I notice that the questions aren’t the same as these. Are these specifically the questions that would be asked in an interview?

The sample questions shown during the webinar reflect the general theme of the questions that referees would typically be asked on calls and in surveys/questionnaires. They will likely be questions that researchers will ask in phone interviews. The questions may not be in the same exact words as in the surveys, but the general ideas that Chambers & Partners want to find out about are the same.

5. Is it better to have referees who can speak specifically to matters that we have submitted? Sometimes we need to drop matters because others are more impressive but the referee is still one that we would like to put forward. Is it stronger to have the referees that can talk to the specific matters that we do select for consistency?

Referees do not necessarily need to align with specific matters. This is encouraged where possible, as researchers can then corroborate a matter in the submission with feedback from someone else who worked on it. However, if the firm has a solid referee who is likely to respond and provide helpful feedback, the referee should not be dropped simply because their matter is not featured on the submission.

6. It was mentioned that the “referring lawyer” column in the referee spreadsheet is helpful, but that’s only relevant for referees who have calls with Chambers right? Most referees receive a survey and in that case that column is irrelevant.

Yes, referees who receive surveys are required to select lawyers from a dropdown menu. However, the “referring lawyer” field should always be completed if possible because they are helpful to researchers when they conduct phone interviews

7. Is it worth describing in the work highlight who worked on the case, given that the team composition is already included in the dedicated row? Isn’t it a waste of characters?

While completing the dedicated field in the work highlight form is crucial, also indicating which lawyers or teams worked on specific aspects of a matter can help clarify roles and responsibilities—especially when multiple partners are involved across different departments, or when you are aiming to have a particular lawyer recognised.

In short, this is optional, but worthwhile if you have the space and a clear reason to mention specific lawyers during the matter description.

8. Given the form encourages us not to just submit lawyer bios that are already available on the website, what are things that can be added to lawyer bios would catch the eyes of Chambers?

We recommend including a hyperlink to the website bio within the individual’s name.

A strong bio should ideally be structured within 150–200 words and include: a brief overview of expertise and education, key track record highlights, ongoing or recent major work, notable publications (if relevant), and a clear indication of where you believe the individual should be ranked.

9. Is it possible to include some confidential details in a disclosable work highlight? If yes, how? Putting sensitive information in red ? Or when in doubt just put it in the non-publishable work? (Some elements of our transactions are public while some aspects we worked on are confidential).

Where a matter combines publishable and non-publishable elements, the matter can be included in the publishable section with the non-publishable aspects written in red font. However, if by nature, the matter is very sensitive and has more confidential aspects, it may be helpful to have the matter in the confidential section. As mentioned earlier, Chambers pays equal attention to publishable and confidential matters.

The post Webinar Recap: Chambers & Partners Research Process – Key Insights, Submission Tips & Ranking Strategies appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

The webinar consisted of a panel that discussed some of Chambers’ major findings from its 2025-6 research and what are of the major trends and challenges that law firms face on an international scale. The panel was hosted by journalist Catherine Baksi, and was made up of:

• Vian Chowdhury, Head of Global International Capabilities at Chambers
• Ollie Dimsdale, Head of Africa, Middle East, Caribbean & Offshore at Chambers
• James Hanratty, General Counsel for Trainline
• Renato Leitie Monteiro, Vice President of Privacy, Data Protection, AI & IP at e&

Research findings: Global trends

• Global M&A saw strong growth in 2025, with total deal value hitting around $4.8 trillion USD. This represents an increase of around 40% compared to last year. There was a particular increase in high-end deals, ie those valued at above $5 billion USD. North America made up over 50% of these transactions, whilst the Asia-Pacific region hit a record of around $1 billion USD.
• Disputes were particularly driven by issues relating to energy, climate change and sanctions. Class actions particularly surged, with settlements reaching $79 billion in the USA alone. International arbitration has also seen major developments, such as recent changes to the UK’s Arbitration Act and a new arbitration law in China.
• In-house counsel are increasingly using AI tools to improve their operations. The primary concerns this year have evolved beyond the design and implementation of these tools, and are now more focussed on ensuring they provide correct evaluations, eliminating hallucinations and verifying output.

Research findings: The Middle East

• The UAE and Saudi Arabia continue to attract international law firms, with several recently opening up in Riyadh, Dubai and Abu Dhabi (including Reed Smith, Gowling, Mischon de Reya and Stephenson Harwood.)
• Chambers’ ranking for Saudi in particular has expanded rapidly, with a new Projects & Energy table introduced and Dispute Resolution now split into Arbitration and Litigation. 
• Chambers coverage of the UAE has also expanded significantly, most notably in its Financial Services Regulation and TMT tables.

Research findings: Africa

• Regulatory change has been a major theme in Africa research this year. Notable examples include major changes to tax legislation in Nigeria and amendments to South Africa’s Black Economic Empowerment policy.
• Chambers’ African coverage has expanded in a few areas. In particular, Uganda and Botswana rankings have changed from a single General Business Law table to separate Corporate/Commercial and Dispute Resolution tables.

Regulatory complexity

The panel discussed in particular the development of more complex regulatory regimes and the geopolitical pressures they are experiencing. For example, the EU’s Digital Markets Act has aimed to create a free and fair digital market across Europe, but whilst it has in some cases moved to enforce against big tech to achieve this, in other cases it has been hesitant to do so, most likely due to certain geopolitical pressures. This risks creating uncertainty for businesses looking to expand and invest in Europe.

AI development

With many regions of the world involved in developing more powerful models of AI, the Middle East is seeking to position itself as a middle ground where both AI development and more sophisticated regulation are being taken up. Virtually all major organisations in technology are heavily investing in AI development, but there is increasing interest in forming a responsible AI framework. The panellists discussed how to make the best use of AI by integrating it into the culture of an organisation. Questions around the usage of AI now falls into three broad categories:

• How to embed AI into a company’s products?
• How to respond to changes in the digital ecosystem caused by AI? For example the increase in initial searches through tools such as ChatGPT instead of traditional search engines.
• How to improve productivity and effectiveness through AI.

How law firms are using AI

The panellists noted that there has not yet been a revolutionary change in the way legal services are being provided due to AI, either in terms of the products provided or the fees being charged. They encouraged firms to take control of the conversation and discuss with clients how AI could be actively implemented to improve their services. So far, firms are mostly interested in developing AI tools for internal use, and they should remain conscious of ensuring that none of this technology is implemented without human oversight. Given the position of expertise that law firms now have with these tools, they can also actively educate clients on their usage and how best to use them. The panellists also noted a potential future challenge with training and developing younger lawyers if simpler, entry-level tasks are to be completely automated.

ESG

Many companies are very vocal about their dedication to ESG matters and a lower carbon economy, but the panel noted that lawyers are in a crucial position to translate this into actionable change. Businesses are increasingly building ESG goals into their KPIs, particularly in the Middle East where climate impact is anticipated to be high. On this matter, law firms can greatly assist their clients by giving an up-to-date picture on the changing regulations and opinion of governments. Providing that strategic market understanding is crucial for businesses to align their approach and set climate targets. The ability for law firms to provide this service is becoming a greater factor in the procurement process for many major businesses. As General Counsels are typically at the forefront of driving for ESG, they expect external counsel to be a partner on this front. It was noted that UK firms are particularly strong in terms of ESG, especially in terms of net-zero commitments.

What GCs expect from external counsel

The panel ended with a discussion of how law firms can best help their in-house counsel and provide the strongest service. With businesses expecting firms to be familiar with technology and helping to educate them on how to use it, firms  need to think of themselves as tech experts. Businesses are also looking for proactive advice on how to power themselves further, not just to reactively deal with issues as they appear. Finally, as legal teams are likely to see more budget constraints over 2026, there will likely be increasing interest in alternative fee arrangements. This will be particularly true in markets such as the Middle East which are becoming more crowded and therefore more competitive. In these markets, law firms offering an associate on secondment is becoming a typical practice to make the gap between law firm and client more seamless.

The post Chambers Global 2026 – Guide Launch Webinar appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Not to ruin it for you, we placed the answers at the end.

Deadlines:

1. Late submissions can have a negative impact on rankings.
2. It is critical to send the referees on time. 

Submissions and individual rankings:

3. If a partner has the strongest work in the submission, they can be ranked without referee feedback.
4. If there are over 20 matters in a submission, the directories will not read the extra matters.
5. Achieving a ranking for individual lawyers is not affected by other lawyer rankings within the same team.
6. There is a quota of up to 5 partners ranked per practice per firm. 
7. Lawyer bios are crucial in the submission form because they determine the individual rankings.
8. Including as many lawyer bios as possible in the submission document is an advantage.

Referee feedback:

9. If a competitor law firm puts down a referee I also want to put down, Chambers will only contact them once. 
10. The average referee response rate to Chambers is 25%.
11. Referee feedback is the most important factor when ranking a firm in Chambers.

And finally…

12. Buying more products offered by the directories increases my chances of improving my rankings.

***

ANSWERS

1. TRUE. Whilst being a day or a week late will not have any real impact, being significantly late with a submission may affect the process of contacting referees. Submissions that are months late may fall outside of the window for research altogether, in which case the directories will be unable to accept a submission until the next research cycle.

2. TRUE. If referees are submitted after research has actively begun, the directories will have less time to get in touch with them and receive your feedback. Legal 500 is particularly keen to ensure referees are received on time because they will send out their first contact to all referees on email at the same time at the very beginning of their research period. Any late referees that miss this first connection might not be contacted further.

3. FALSE. The directories greatly value referee feedback to confirm what they read in the submissions, particularly Chambers. If a lawyer has excellent work but no referee feedback, the directories will likely note their potential and hold their ranking for a year to find out more about them in the next cycle.

4. TRUE. Whilst adding 1-2 extra matters won’t have a serious impact, if a researcher finds a submission that is 25-30 matters long (or even longer!), they are trained to read just the first 20 matters. This is to keep the process equitable so that no firm gets to present more information than others.

5. TRUE. All lawyers are judged independently of each other and are assessed by the amount and quality of their work in the submission and feedback they receive. Firms should however consider the balance of work between the lawyers they would like to see ranked, as partners with a greater amount of higher quality work have a stronger chance of ranking.

6. FALSE. None of the directories set a hard limit to the number of partners ranked in a practice area. However, because the space provided by submission documents is limited, it can become harder to balance the work highlights the more ranked lawyers a team has so that everyone has enough evidence.

7. FALSE. Individual rankings are primarily determined by the work highlights that a lawyer appears on and the quality of that work. The lawyer bios can provide some useful context, but they are a much less significant part of the submission document when it comes to deciding rankings.

8. FALSE. Whilst giving fair credit to all of your lawyers can show the depth of your team, it can also make it harder for the researcher to determine which individuals they should consider for a ranking. We would recommend just including bios for lawyers who feature heavily in the work highlights and that your team would like the researchers to consider.

9. TRUE. Researchers at Chambers will cover all firms that the same referee has been nominated to speak about at the same time. For this reason, we recommend submitting all your referee lists on the first Chambers deadline so that your team does not miss out if a referee are contacted earlier than scheduled to discuss other law firms.

10. FALSE. The average response rate across all sectors and guides in Chambers is closer to 35%, although this rate is increasing since the introduction of the Research Management Tool. This means that achieving responses of 40% or higher in a particular section will be in a good position to improve their rankings.

11. TRUE. The most significant difference between Chambers and Legal 500 is that Chambers values referee feedback the most, whereas Legal 500 is primarily led by the evidence in the submission.

12. FALSE. The big reputable directories are explicitly not pay-to-play. They recognise that the integrity of their rankings is vital, and so their research teams continue to be separated from their commercial activities.

The post Test Yourself – How Prepared for 2026 Submissions? appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

The launch is, of course, a time to celebrate the great achievements of our colleagues. In some respects, it also marks the start of the next research cycle (to anyone who joined my webinar on elevating submissions through analysis, your analysis time starts here!).

This year’s launch also gave us some fascinating insights into what general counsel are looking for and how current trends are shaping clients’ needs when it comes to external legal providers. As part of the launch event, Chambers Asia-Pacific Research Director Sarah Kogan spoke to Kenji Tagaya, Head of Legal and Secretariat Division at Jera, and Rishi Gautam, Global General Counsel at Tata Consumer Products.

Here are the key takeaways from their conversations, as well as some facts about the 2026 guide and the forthcoming 2027 research.

• The expectations on GCs have changed.
  Both Mr Tagaya and Mr Gautam noted how GCs are no longer supporting players who simply think about business risks and compliance. Now, they have to think about how to be business-enablers and strategic partners to business as well – or “finding ways to say yes in a responsible manner,” as Mr Gautam put it.

• GCs’ expectations of external counsel are changing.
  As GCs are expected to now be strategic partners, so too are external counsel expected to be strategic advisors. Mr Tagaya noted how law firms need to be able to be sounding boards and providers of high-level strategic advice. Mr Gautam emphasised the need for tailored solutions that work not only for the client but also for other parties involved in the matter.
  
  For example, in an M&A, Mr Gautam said how successfully completing the acquisition is only half the battle; the other, equally critical part is successfully integrating the target and its people.

• GCs are looking for solutions in what are challenging regulatory environments.
  Both Mr Tagaya and Mr Gautam referenced the regulatory changes and unforeseen events that have occurred in the last few years – things like tariffs and sanctions and policy changes in light of concerns over energy security.
  
  For Mr Tagaya, he wants external counsel to be capable of keeping up with the pace of change, especially when there are time pressures and not a single solution to the problem. Straightforward legal interpretation alone is not enough, in his view. For Mr Gautam, he views external counsel as a thought leader or steward for explaining ever-evolving, complex regulatory mandates to business.

• AI is changing the market…
  Both GCs have been seeing increased use of AI when it comes to legal advice. The technology is being used for things like online searches and legal research, simple answers, basic drafting, and document review.

• …but GCs are still conscious of the power of old-style legal consultations.
  While Mr Gautam acknowledges the efficiencies and cost/time savings that AI, can bring (and expects these efficiencies to be passed on to the client), he remains cautious, noting that the technology is still at an early stage and prone to mistakes.
  
  “We wouldn’t want [hallucination] to happen with us at any cost,” he said. “Credibility of the legal advice and credibility of the work product is a no-compromise for us.”
  
  For both him and Mr Tagaya, human interaction remains key. Mr Gautam is looking for assurances from legal providers that when AI is involved, external counsel will ensure that confidential material remains confidential and any AI output is checked and verified by a human. Mr Tagaya asserts that truly strategic advice can only be gained from interacting with external legal counsel.

• A strong existing relationship can be an initial advantage.
  When it comes to selecting external counsel to provide consultations and assist with complex situations, there was a clear preference for already trusted firms – even over brand names.
  
  Both GCs noted that an existing relationship enables nimble responses, as clients don’t need to spend time teaching external counsel about their business. And counsel without that background can often be of limited use in business procedures that require a patient and nuanced understanding of various aspects: cultural, administrative, financial, etc.
  
  Mr Tagaya and Mr Gautam also spoke about the trust and understanding of clients’ ways of working that can be built up through multiple interactions, which can give a client confidence in exceptional and challenging situations.

• GCs are concerned about the evolving business environment.
  With an array of external (and often unanticipated and unbudgeted-for) factors impacting clients’ day-to-day working – such as regulatory challenges, evolving customer demands, and various different but important stakeholders to satisfy – it is likely that there is no one single solution for the issues businesses face. Instead, in-house counsel want to see an honest effort and a certain degree of nimbleness to be able to work around the emerging situations that happen.

On Chambers Asia-Pacific research

• Chambers reiterated the importance of client opinions, calling them “central to our research methodology” and emphasising that Research seeks to understand the market by learning what clients consider key priorities when instructing outside counsel.
• Chambers utilises similar criteria when ranking lawyers and seeks to highlight where they have demonstrated excellence in their expertise, recent work, and client service.

Chambers will be sharing later a further document with greater details regarding the Research team’s insights regarding market trends, as well as more information on how the guide has been updated in this new release.

Asia-Pacific 2026 research stats

The 2026 guide consists of 3,993 department rankings and 7,173 lawyer rankings (of which 438 are Up-and-coming Individuals or Associates to Watch). Research received over 5,300 submissions and conducted over 22,000 surveys and over 5,000 telephone interviews.

The submissions and research enabled an updated set of rankings to be produced and the introduction of new market coverage. Specifically, Chambers introduced new tables for:

• Asia-Pacific Region, International Arbitration – The Bar 
• Australia, Media & Defamation: The Bar
• Japan, Shipping
• Indonesia, Startups & Emerging Companies

Asia-Pacific 2027

Research for Asia-Pacific runs from  February  to  August, and submissions for the 2027 Asia-Pacific Guide are open. The next deadline is 21 January 2026.

You can view the full schedule  here.

Please note that the referee limit for Chambers Asia-Pacific is 30 per practice area.

The post Webinar Watch: Chambers Asia-Pacific Guide 2026 appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Chambers does offer solutions to this problem, front and centre being Insight, which it claims will provide you with “tailored guidance to improve your firm’s rankings.” This sounds promising, but what can you expect if you buy?

Let’s talk about this product in this forthcoming series of articles, starting with what an Insight report actually is and contains. Join me for the insight scoop.

What is Insight?

Insight is a bespoke, paid-for online business report that aims to give firms a clearer understanding of their performance in current research and, by extension, the rationale behind Chambers’ ranking decisions.

Firms can choose to purchase by guide and practice area, allowing them to tailor the size and focus of their order. For example, a firm could get a report on its entire practice, or on just the tables it wants to improve in, or on something in between.

Reports come in two varieties: the Client and Market Intelligence (CMI) report and the Client Intelligence (CI) report. But what is the difference in terms of content?

In short, the CMI has two main features a CI lacks: peer feedback and analysis of up to three other firms in the table in question. While these analyses do not divulge confidential information, they should shed light on what competitors are doing to earn their rankings.

What is included in an Insight report?

For the overall team:

For individuals who this year have or have lost a ranking or an internal Potential designation:

For individuals without a ranking in the last 2+ years:

*Please note, these features are new additions for Europe 2025 and beyond. As a result, there might be a bedding-in period while Chambers builds up the data sets that power them. Certain features might not initially be included in the final version of the Insight report if they are drawing on incomplete data sets.

Which one is right for me?

The choice of report type – or whether even to buy at all – will be a personal decision, informed by your department’s goals, budget, and intentions for the report. However, here are some possible uses and benefits for both products.

• Gain an understanding of what Chambers thinks are your team’s and individuals’ strengths and weaknesses. Understanding how Chambers views your performance can help you pinpoint and address perceived areas of weakness.
• Find out how your department might improve its performance. An Insight report’s recommendations for improvement can shed light on perceived successes or shortcomings in your work highlights and client response. Knowing this might provide clear pathways to stronger performances.
• See what clients are saying about your team and individuals. Feedback is anonymised, allowing clients to speak honestly and openly about their experiences and opinions. These comments highlight aspects of the service that clients highly value and areas they think could do with addressing. By knowing what clients think, you can enhance your offering.
• Obtain quotes for marketing purposes. As long as firms credit Chambers as the source, they can use any of the quotes in their Insight report for marketing, as testaments to their service standard.

CMI only

• Learn what the market thinks. Insight into how other firms perceive your practice might give you a better idea of how to market yourself to ensure you are always putting your best foot forward.
• Understand what competitors are doing differently or similarly. The analysis of other firms should shed light on what makes groups in higher tiers stand out. This can offer deeper insight into the factors underpinning these higher rankings.

Conclusion

Chambers offers two types of bespoke report for firms seeking to improve their rankings. Both the CI and the CMI provide insight into team and individual performances across Chambers’ research metrics and offer recommendations for improvement. However, the CMI goes further, for an added financial cost, providing customers with feedback from wider market sources and analysis of competitors’ strengths.

Neither report is necessary to attain or improve a Chambers ranking, but both can be a useful addition to a firm’s submission toolkit. By finding out what research thinks of your performance and where you are falling short, you can work to address these perceived weaknesses and present your practice to Chambers in the best light, which could in turn lead to progress within the guides.

About the Author: Robert Charters is a Legal Directories Editor at Tier One Rankings with a decade of experience as an editor and Principal Research Specialist on Chambers Insight.

The post The Insight Track to Improving Your Chambers Ranking appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

• 13,756 Department or Organisation Rankings
• 29,840 Lawyer Rankings
• 3,060 Newly Ranked Lawyers
• 2,522 Up-and-Comers and Associates to Watch

General Counsel Insights and Strategic Assessment

A significant new feature of the 2025 Global Guide is the inclusion of General Counsel (GC) Tables, offering deep insights into the evolving role of 270 in-house lawyers across key regions, including Africa, Asia-Pacific, Brazil, Canada, Europe, Greater China Region, Latin America, the Middle East, the UK, and the USA. These tables provide a strategic assessment of legal team development and management, focusing on best practices in internal team structuring, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI), and Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) initiatives. The insights are further enriched by contributions from private lawyers, offering a comprehensive overview of the relationship between in-house teams and external counsel.

More information on how to participate in future editions will be provided in due course.

Regional Insights

AMECO (Africa, Middle East, and Caribbean Offshore)

Despite conflicts in parts of Africa and the Middle East, AMECO experienced one of its busiest years, with rankings surpassing 2,000 for the first time. Notably, 2158 rankings across 100 jurisdictions reflect the growing importance of this region, with new tables launched in 2025, including:

• Israel Investment Funds
• Mauritius Banking & Finance
• Nigeria Capital Markets and Competition
• Saudi Arabia Public Policy & Regulatory Affairs
• Somalia General Business Law
• UAE Regulatory: Financial Services, TMT (Media, Entertainment & Sport), and Transportation: Aviation

The top firms by Band 1 rankings continue to be largely dominated by international outfits, though leading local firms such as South Africa’s Webber Wentzel and Israel’s FISCHER, Herzog Fox & Neeman, and Meitar also notably feature in the top 10 list.

Also of note, an increased emphasis on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) during the research period led to nearly doubling the number of ranked associates from 50 to 90, further promoting diverse junior lawyer recognition in the region.

Caribbean Market: Renewed Activity and Regulatory Developments

While the Cayman Islands experienced a period of relative quiet since 2023 due to rising interest rates and bank failures, there are early signs of a rebound in key areas such M&A, finance, and securitisation. In response to growing regulatory demands, Cayman law firms have made substantial investments in strengthening their financial regulatory capabilities to better support their clients.

Meanwhile, the British Virgin Islands (BVI) have witnessed notable growth in the funds sector, driven by the popularity of new BVI fund products and the emergence of regulatory challenges in the Cayman Islands, positioning the BVI as an increasingly attractive jurisdiction for fund-related activities.

Africa: Post-Election Recovery and Emerging Opportunities

The African market has shown resilience amidst post-election uncertainty, particularly in South Africa, where initial investor hesitation due to market volatility is gradually giving way to increased activity in transactional markets.

Kenya continues to solidify its status as a technology hub for Eastern Africa, attracting startups that favour efficient dispute resolution mechanisms like arbitration over lengthy court processes. This emphasis on streamlined resolution has created a favourable investment climate, supported by internationally recognised dispute resolution frameworks. Additionally, Kenyan tax litigation remains highly active, driven by the Kenya Revenue Authority’s increasingly assertive approach, resulting in growing client demand in this area.

In Angola, interest from large clients is expanding due to the Lobito Corridor, a key infrastructure project that will enhance transportation for the mining sector while supporting the country’s efforts to diversify its economy, particularly through alternative energy initiatives spearheaded by Middle Eastern investors.

Saudi Arabia and UAE: Regulatory Developments and Market Expansion

The Saudi legal market is undergoing significant transformation with continuous regulatory changes. New policies limit legal advisory work on Saudi law outside the country to 30%, prompting international law firms to establish local offices. These firms are expanding their presence through lateral hires, benefiting from the emergence of a new generation of highly skilled Saudi lawyers.

In the UAE, the alignment of ranking tables with lawyer specialisations has enhanced recognition accuracy. Gender parity has also improved significantly, with female representation exceeding 30% in several areas, although Banking & Finance, Corporate/M&A, and Capital Markets still have room for growth.

The post Chambers Global Guide 2025: Key Insights from the Launch Webinar 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.

Key Developments Across the Region

The 2025 Guide sheds light on emerging trends and critical updates shaping the South and Southeast Asian legal markets. Below is a summary of notable advancements in various jurisdictions:

India: Driving Innovation in Tech, Media, and Capital Markets

India’s legal market continues to reflect the country’s growing global stature. Significant trends include:

• Digital Transformation:

The Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDP) 2023 has introduced new compliance challenges for businesses, with law firms advising major tech companies like Amazon and Google. The Unified Payments Interface (UPI) has also driven legal work, particularly in fintech innovations such as speech-to-text AI and third-party payment systems.

• Media & Entertainment Sector Growth:

The increasing regulation of OTT platforms, high-profile defamation cases, and generative AI’s influence on media are fueling demand for legal expertise. Cases such as *The Kerala Story* and celebrity endorsement disputes have been pivotal. Chambers has responded by introducing a dedicated Media & Entertainment table.

• Capital Markets Rebound:

Despite global economic challenges, India’s IPO activity remains robust, exemplified by Ola Electric’s landmark listing. The Social Stock Exchange has also emerged as a groundbreaking platform, enabling non-profits to list and access capital markets.

• Indonesia: Emerging Fintech Hub

Indonesia’s fintech sector is experiencing rapid growth, driven by widespread digital payment adoption and evolving regulatory frameworks. Legal firms are increasingly focused on navigating cryptocurrency regulations, solidifying Indonesia’s position as a critical fintech market.

• Malaysia: Cybersecurity Takes Center Stage

Malaysia’s legislative advancements in technology law, highlighted by the Cybersecurity Bill 2024, signify a commitment to secure digital transformation. The establishment of the Cybersecurity Centre of Excellence in Kuala Lumpur further cements its role in fostering technological progress.

• Singapore: Leadership in AI Governance

Singapore is leading the way in AI governance, having unveiled a draft framework for generative AI. Legal practitioners are addressing challenges posed by AI disruption across industries and advising on significant investments in AI startups.

Capital Markets Across APAC: A Mixed Outlook

• Australia:

Capital markets have been subdued, influenced by inflation and geopolitical tensions. However, an optimistic forecast for 2024 suggests potential growth in equity markets.

• Hong Kong:

While the region continues to face a third consecutive year of decline, privatization deals are on the rise. New regulations targeting startups and tech companies hint at a potential recovery.

• Japan:

Low interest rates and active private equity markets have spurred significant M&A activity, including Toshiba’s $13.5 billion take-private deal.

Mergers and Acquisitions: Resilience Amid Challenges

Southeast Asia is witnessing a resurgence in M&A activity despite global economic headwinds. Singapore leads the region in deal volume, while Japan is experiencing an increase in unsolicited takeover bids, driven by recent regulatory changes. In India, domestic M&A remains strong, with Reliance’s $8.5 billion joint venture with Disney being a standout transaction.

Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion (DEI) in the Legal Market

Diversity remains a focal point, with women comprising 23.5% of ranked lawyers in the 2025 guide. While smaller markets like Laos and Sri Lanka lead in gender representation, larger jurisdictions such as Japan and South Korea still have room for progress.

The post Key Developments from the Chambers Asia-Pacific 2025 Guide Launch appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Fintech Funding & M&A

The global FinTech funding landscape is facing challenges, as recent KPMG data highlights a decline in equity funding. Although interest rates have dipped slightly, the overall market remains subdued. Sectors like PropTech and consumer FinTech are experiencing slower growth, while transactional work, startups, and regulatory trends dominate industry conversations. In spite of this, $51.9 billion in funding was raised in the first half of 2024, emphasizing the sector’s continued investment potential.

Notably, many M&A deals have been delayed during the first half of 2024, as stakeholders await the outcome of the US election. This pause underscores the broader uncertainty in the market but also highlights opportunities for growth and innovation in areas that prioritize resilience and adaptability.

Crypto in the US and Around the World

Cryptocurrency continues to play a pivotal role in shaping the financial landscape, especially in the US. The industry has a history of engaging with the political sphere, exemplified by high-profile donations such as those from Sam Bankman-Fried and FTX. The 2024 election cycle has ushered in what is considered the most pro-crypto Congress in history, with promises to implement regulatory reforms.

President-elect Trump has vowed to replace SEC Chair Gary Gensler, a long-time critic of cryptocurrency, and introduce measures such as a crypto advisory council and a strategic bitcoin reserve. The crypto market is closely watching for clarity in areas like digital asset regulation, SEC and CFTC rulemaking, and the cessation of “regulation by enforcement.” Businesses are particularly eager for advancements in cryptocurrency bank accounts and broader regulatory approvals, which would provide a more stable foundation for growth.

Crypto Industry’s Increased Political Influence in US Elections

The cryptocurrency industry has significantly amplified its political influence in recent years, with the 2024 U.S. elections marking a watershed moment in its engagement with the political process. While crypto donations to political campaigns are not new—most famously exemplified by Sam Bankman-Fried and FTX’s contributions to both parties—the 2024 election cycle saw a more strategic and focused approach. Industry-aligned political action committees (PACs) like the Fair Shake PAC raised over $160 million, channeling funds to support pro-crypto legislators and target crypto skeptics. High-profile donors, including Coinbase, Ripple Labs, Marc Andreessen, Ben Horowitz, and the Winklevoss twins, played a pivotal role in this effort.

In Ohio, crypto-backed groups invested $40 million to support blockchain entrepreneur Bernie Moreno, who successfully unseated Senate Banking Chair Sherrod Brown, a known critic of the industry. Similarly, in California, crypto PACs influenced primary races by spending $10 million to oppose Representative Katie Porter’s Senate bid, favoring the pro-crypto Adam Schiff instead. This aggressive, bipartisan approach to campaigning and lobbying has resulted in what commentators have dubbed “the most pro-crypto Congress ever.” The crypto industry’s concerted efforts to shape the political landscape underscore the growing significance of regulatory debates in digital assets and reflect a new era of political engagement for the sector.

AI in Financial Services

Artificial intelligence is transforming the FinTech sector, as companies increasingly integrate AI into their offerings to enhance efficiency and service delivery. Notably, OpenAI has raised $6.6 billion in funding, achieving a valuation of $157 billion, reflecting the growing importance of AI in financial services. Financial firms are also exploring ways to leverage AI for client research, but critical questions persist: What liabilities arise if AI produces errors? How can firms ensure the accuracy and reliability of AI-generated outputs before delivering them to clients?

The enthusiasm for automation is particularly strong in historically labour-intensive areas such as compliance, sanctions, anti-money laundering, and fraud detection. By embracing AI, companies aim to reduce costs and time inefficiencies while maintaining high standards of accuracy and compliance.

Tokenization of Real-World Assets

The tokenization of real-world assets is experiencing significant growth, driven by innovations in stablecoins like gold-backed cryptocurrencies. The ability to trade assets such as gold more efficiently and accessibly—enabled by fractional ownership—has spurred widespread interest in this space. Tokenization offers new avenues for investment and trading, breaking down barriers that have traditionally limited participation in high-value asset markets.

As the FinTech industry continues to evolve, tokenization is poised to play a central role in democratizing access to tangible assets, opening up exciting possibilities for investors and market participants alike.

The post Key Developments from the FinTech 2025 Guide Launch appeared first on Tier One Rankings.

Chambers UK has just launched its 2025 guide, the most comprehensive yet, offering invaluable insights into the UK legal market. This year’s guide introduces over 200 new department recognitions and a 6.5% increase in lawyer rankings, with more than 600 new entries, 370 of which are women. With 57,000 responses and seven months of research, Chambers continues to set the gold standard for legal rankings.

New Initiatives and Market Trends

One of the standout updates in this release is Chambers’ growing focus on gender diversity. Over the past three years, they’ve added over 1,000 women to their rankings and have nearly closed the gap to a 60/40 ratio of ranked men to women. In addition, Chambers has enhanced its ability to highlight niche firms through the introduction of new tables, such as SME-focused firms and dispute resolution specialists.

The SME-focused category is a significant addition. It’s aimed at recognizing firms that excel in serving small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), a client base that’s seen a 24% rise since 2010. These firms often cater to very different needs compared to larger corporations, and Chambers is now offering more targeted rankings to reflect this. More about the SME-focused table in our previous blog post https://tieronerankings.com/introducing-chambers-uks-new-opportunity-for-sme-focused-law-firms/.

Refined Categories and Sector Focus

Chambers is also introducing more refined categories to better address changes in the legal market. For instance, the decline of PFI and PPP projects has led to a shift towards two key categories: “Projects Domestic” and “Projects International,” which streamline Chambers’ recognition of project-related work.

At the same time, the guide has discontinued less active categories such as Retail: Corporate & Competition and Aviation: Commercial, reflecting evolving market priorities.

AI-related legal work has also become a central theme in this year’s submissions. More firms are now engaged in AI governance, data protection, and intellectual property issues. Chambers’ analysts noted a surge in AI-related cases across multiple sectors, reflecting the technology’s growing influence on business strategy and legal frameworks.

Litigation Market and Future Rankings

Chambers has also highlighted shifts in the litigation market, with a new table for dispute resolution specialist firms. Litigation boutiques have been on the rise, offering personalized service at competitive rates. This year’s guide shines a light on 15 firms in this growing space.

Additionally, for the UK 2026 guide, Chambers will be expanding its ranking criteria by asking firms to provide 20 referees, particularly in the SME-focused category. This will offer deeper insight into what makes a firm an ideal fit for SME clients and help expand the rankings in this area.

Upcoming Awards and Looking Ahead

Chambers also announced its inaugural UK Solicitors Awards, set for February 13, 2025. These awards will recognize the top-performing legal teams in over 20 categories, ranging from finance to pro bono work, and will be a major event to watch for industry leaders.

Chambers continues to evolve alongside the UK legal market. By expanding its categories and adapting its research methods, the guide ensures that it remains a vital resource for firms and clients alike. With the legal landscape shifting rapidly—thanks to factors like AI, gender diversity, and SME growth—Chambers UK’s rankings reflect not only the best firms today but also those leading tomorrow’s trends.

The post Chambers UK Guide Launch 2025 – Webinar Watch appeared first on Tier One Rankings.