The Financial Times asked me to comment on a recent survey showing that more than 50% of associates in elite law firms struggle with “unmanageable” levels of stress, while 75% of partners are happy in their work.

A high proportion of associates have always found the situation unmanageable; the up-or-out structure demands a significant proportion of associates quit before they make partner.

So there is an inbuilt “survivor bias”, meaning that many who do make partner find it difficult to fully comprehend the difficulties their associates experience, and may lack the empathy or insight to understand how much law firms and associates’ lives have changed since they themselves were promoted.

But some partners have always understood that, like clients, associates need to be handled carefully if you want to get the best out of them. With the new generation of associates, this is more important than ever.
 
As I say in the article: if half the associates find it unmanageable, the key question is: which half? Are the firms losing really good associates who, with greater care from their partners, could have developed into really good partners themselves? In elite firms, does it make sense that lawyers are promoted as much for their mental resilience and physical robustness as their technical ability and client skills?
 

Read my Harvard Business Review article "If you’re so successful why are you still working 70 hours a week.” 

Listen to my BBC podcast episode on overwork and elite professionals.