5 Things Associates Must Ask About Their Firm's Merger Plan

Key Takeaways

• Law firm merger activity is rising, and associates are often the most directly affected as organizations integrate and evolve.
• Associates who navigate mergers successfully tend to ask targeted questions early about partner retention, workflow stability, and integration progress.
• Partner departures, especially within the first two years post-merger, can significantly impact associate mentorship and access to work.
• Practice group overlap is a key risk factor, with higher potential for restructuring, reduced hours, and shifting staffing dynamics.
• Post-merger integration is uneven in many firms, and limited cross-firm collaboration can signal ongoing structural or cultural challenges.
• Ultimately, mergers reflect broader market stratification, and associates who assess how their firm’s position is changing will be better equipped to manage their career path.

With law firm mergers ticking steadily upward for the past three years, and new data showing that one in five large firms expects some form of acquisition this year,[1] combinations are on the mind of attorneys at every level.

While mergers can create opportunity and growth potential across the firm, for associates, a new merger can often bring initial uncertainty. The associates who tend to navigate mergers best share a common trait: They ask the right questions early.

If your firm has announced or recently completed a merger, here are the five questions that should be at the top of your list.

What are the partners in your group going to do?

This may be the most overlooked merger risk of all. Mergers frequently trigger new conflict checks, rate structure changes and client realignments — all conditions that make unhappy partners leave, often within six to 24 months of closing. When a sponsor partner departs, the associates who depend on them are suddenly facing reduced work and a lack of mentorship that put them quietly at risk.

Watch the signals: Are your partners engaging across the combined firm? Do they talk about the future in a way that includes themselves? Are they sponsoring you for work with partners on the other side?

More practically, do not let your assignments depend entirely on one or two partners whose long-term commitment to the new firm may be unclear. The associates who weather mergers best are those with relationships distributed across the combined partnership and have numerous pipelines for assignments.

Is there significant practice group overlap?

When two firms with similar practice groups merge, there is heightened risk for lateral partner departures and adjustments to staffing within practice groups. The lateral partner attrition risk post-merger for groups that heavily overlap is magnified for many reasons.

Some reasons include choices of leadership, difference of opinions around strategy, client conflicts and personal partner considerations, and certain partners feeling sidelined. Where there is significant practice overlap, the risk of integration issues is exacerbated. This can trickle down to the associates once the partners start to depart the firm.

This is not necessarily a concern if the associate can maintain their hours and development, but partner departures can threaten this. If you're in a group with significant overlap post-merger, know that you're most exposed to potential workflow contractions and should pay close attention to how this is handled during the transition.

By contrast, mergers between firms with genuinely complementary footprints carry far less risk of overlap and workflow contractions. Take stock of your group's redundancy risk before the integration teams even start meeting.

What is happening with your hours and headcount?

Billable hour stagnation is one of the most underappreciated, and least discussed, post-merger risks for associates. The consideration is simple: Is there enough workflow to support associates after the dust settles post-merger? The answer often depends on what the partners in the overlapping groups decide to do post-merger.

When these groups merge and partners choose to make a lateral move because of significant group overlap as well as other factors, workflows can shift as a result as teams adjust. It can result in hoarding of hours by senior or midlevel associates, and junior associates may find themselves struggling to hit bonus hour targets.

The risk here isn't always a layoff. By the time associates recognize they've lost momentum and billable hours, they may have already lost valuable months of skill development during a critical period. Once a slowdown in hours occurs, it can also become more challenging to assess the wider market and where your position may fall within it.

Watch for declining hours without an obvious market explanation, quiet cost-cutting signals within your group or a sponsor partner who has suddenly gone cold. The bottom line is straightforward: If you are busy, doing substantive work, and feel good about your standing, a merger may not be a risk.

How is the integration actually going?

A merger on paper does not necessarily mean a merger in practice. Firms can remain siloed for months or years after signing, with cultures, work streams and even physical offices still running parallel tracks. This has significant implications for associates, because a firm that hasn't integrated its day-to-day work is a firm that hasn't totally figured out its talent priorities.

Red flags include partners from one legacy firm consistently declining to staff associates from the other, little or no cross-firm collaboration on active matters, and no visible leadership investment in bringing the two cultures together. Positive signs are the opposite: active cross-staffing, structured events to build relationships across legacy teams, and partners who speak about the combined firm proactively.

One underrated integration barometer is shared pro bono matters. Historically, pro bono matters have been used as a low-pressure way to get attorneys from both legacy firms working side by side.

What could the firm and its culture look like once the dust settles?

A merger is a legitimate reason to take a step back and assess your desired trajectory. It's by no means a crisis, but it is an inflection point. If the firm has materially changed in culture, strategic direction, or the quality and volume of work flowing to your group, it is worth asking honestly how those changes may affect your day-to-day experience, development and professional goals.

Timing matters more than most associates realize. Post-merger adjustment periods can take some time to stabilize. For associates at firms considering a merger, it can be genuinely difficult to assess what you're walking into or how it might stabilize over time.

The current merger wave is not random. It reflects a deeper stratification in the legal market: The gap between elite firms and everyone else is widening, and mid-market firms are combining to compete on scale. That context matters for associates because where a combined firm lands in the market hierarchy post-merger has real implications for the quality of work, the caliber of training and the career trajectory for attorneys.

With the pace of merger deals on track to continue this year, associates who understand what mergers truly mean — for their group, their partners, their hours and their options — will be better positioned than those who simply hope for the best. Most important for these attorneys is to ask the right questions, early on.