// external lawyers often win clients by projecting total self-assuredness. it takes humility and self-awareness to separate confidence from hubris.
One of the most rewarding aspects of my legal career has been the time I spent in-house, providing legal and practical advice in support of global operations that advanced a variety of high public interests. I had the privilege of leading a mixed team of lawyers and disclosure professionals, later taking a lateral step into an operational leadership role.
It was my powerful sense of mission, rather than any sense of ambition or career planning, that diverted me from what was then a promising private practice as a self-employed public law barrister to take up an opaque and considerably less well-remunerated role in service of the state.
At the time, I found it rather difficult to relay this civic motivation to some of my peers. I suspect that there were several reasons for this — not all of which reflect well on me, including a reluctance (then) to share my innermost drivers lest they be ridiculed and invalidated by those I respect. imagine my relief when I found myself working ‘behind the wire’ with a community of likeminded professionals dedicated to ‘the mission’: I recall a palpable sense of having found my people in my new employed role.
One of the challenges I faced in rationalising my decision was, regrettably, inescapably cultural. Naming no names: Within some of the more Dickensian corners of the medieval Inns of Court there hangs an air of intellectual snobbery that tends to subordinate employed lawyers to self-employed counsel. Some appear to believe that only the very best lawyers in a generation can cut it at the ‘independent’ bar — a term that in itself ignores the fearless professionalism of employed lawyers, whose duty to give unwelcome advice to their superiors can feel uniquely career-limiting.
This outlook is not merely anecdotal. In its 2023 review of Life at the Employed Bar, the Bar Council of England and Wales identified a clear “lack of respect from the self-employed Bar” and “a strong view that the skills of employed barristers are under-valued by the profession more widely.” I am fortunate to have retained the support of my chambers, whose members and clerks recognised the knowledge and skills that could flow from such a career move and took a refreshingly progressive and patient view of my unusual move. Without their support I would have found it much harder to transition back to self-employment when the time came, six years later.
It is my firm view that this negative perception of employed barristers is harmful to the legal profession at large. The toxic idea that those who resort to employed practice are feeble of mind, rearing children, or both, overlooks the richness that an employed mode of practice can bring to one’s professional outlook. simply put, my employed practice has afforded me skills and insight that I would never have developed in self-employment. I have travelled to three continents to represent British interests overseas. I have used my vantage point as an in-house lawyer to lead the resolution of problems that might otherwise have gone undiscovered. I have addressed judges, senior officials, ministers and foreign dignitaries on the heady interplay between technology and law. I have won awards for my contributions to the delivery of operational outcomes. I have supported team members facing profound personal and professional trauma. I was supported to take a commission in the royal Air Force — consolidating these experiences and affording me the confidence to conceive of my role as a lawyer as fundamentally about leadership.
For all these reasons, I emerged from my employed practice with a clear desire to abandon the transactional model of instructions in, advice out. Instead, I proactively seek out opportunities to partner with my clients to support the delivery of transformational change. That is the philosophy that underpins pwn.legal.
reflecting on my career to datereveals the following principles that guide my approach to legal practice:
- At a fundamental level, organisations are teams of people. Instructing me to advise or represent an organisation makes me part of that team, even if only for a brief period.
- The most powerful unifying factor in any team arises from a shared sense of purpose. This must be cultivated and restated to remain relevant. It’s important to establish what this is early on, taking a leading role in shaping it if necessary.
- This shared purpose creates a culture of Belonging, in which contributions to those shared aims are intrinsically valued. Each person’s investment in the success of the mission is also an investment in one another. Lawyers form an important part of that constant dialogue.
- Commitment to that shared mission gives rise to a problem-solving approach, in which team members work together proactively to identify opportunities and mitigate risks without compromising professionalism. As a functional part of that team, lawyers should strive to find a way through a problem, even if that means treading a treacherous path.
- In order to do this effectively, it’s important to identify the expertise within client teams and invest time in asking questions about the operational context in which the legal issue arises. Never assume that they’ve asked you for help as a last resort because they’re out of ideas. See yourself not as the saviour, but as a catalyst for collaboration; an outsider-inside bringing fresh ideas to an already-rich table. actively build consensus, rather than issuing a learned legal edict from afar.
These principles shape my approach to my legal practice. If you believe that they could fit within your organisation, I would be delighted to hear from you.
Richard Hanstock, Technology & Public Law Barrister
[email protected]
