Fee-earners today are under pressure from all sides: increasingly demanding clients, complex compliance rules, and rising expectations around growth and performance.

Steve Brett, founder of E3 Compliance Training and Executive Board Member of the UK LegalTech Association, spends his time working with compliance teams mainly inside law and financial services firms. He’s seen first-hand how firm culture, leadership and communication shape the way compliance is handled – and how that, in turn, affects fee-earners.

We spoke to Steve for our latest report, Under pressure: how fee-earners are balancing compliance, client expectations, and growth in 2025. 

In this Q&A, he shares his views on why culture matters, what makes compliance effective, and how firms can better support their lawyers to do the right thing.

Q: What are compliance teams telling you about their relationship with fee-earners?

A: It depends on the firm – but when the relationship is collaborative, it tends to work well. The best compliance teams don’t just enforce rules. They communicate openly, understand commercial pressures, and try to make things work. 

That being said, it’s not always easy. Most fee-earners didn’t train to become lawyers so they could spend their days thinking about compliance. They see the volume of checks increasing and feel overwhelmed. That disconnect in worldview can inevitably lead to tension.

If compliance is seen as the “business prevention team” or a drain on revenue, it becomes adversarial. However, most compliance professionals I know want to help. They’re pragmatic. Sometimes they have to say no – whether that’s dealing with a sanctioned client or handling something outside the firm’s risk appetite – but the goal is always to protect the firm, not block business for the sake of it.

Q: Where can things go wrong?

A: Culture is everything. When compliance and fee-earners operate in silos, or when leaders don’t back their compliance teams, things fall apart. I spoke to a compliance professional recently who’s likely to leave their firm – not because they don’t believe in the work, but because they’ve had no support from the top. Without that tone from the top, compliance becomes an uphill battle.

Another issue is when firms excuse bad behaviour because someone brings in revenue. If a rainmaker ignores compliance but keeps billing, they often get a free pass. That sets a dangerous precedent. In other sectors, being a poor team player is a deal-breaker – even if you're hitting targets. Law isn’t quite there yet, but it needs to get there.

When compliance is treated as an afterthought, it’s like trying to nail water to a wall. You can’t build a strong risk culture on that foundation.

Q: Have you seen firms turn this around?

A: Yes – and often it comes down to how compliance is positioned internally. When compliance works closely with fee-earners and builds trust, you start to see a shift. Social pressure plays a big role too. If most of the team are on board, the outliers stand out – and that encourages a “get with the programme” mentality.

However, it’s harder when the person resisting compliance is a top biller. In some firms, that kind of behaviour still gets a pass. The question isn’t just what that person brings in, but what their behaviour costs the rest of the firm. Some firms are starting to wake up to that. But there’s still work to do.

Q: Are there signs that fee-earners are becoming more engaged with compliance?

‍

A: Definitely. The rise in tech adoption has made a difference. A few years ago, compliance teams were still arguing the case for electronic ID checks. Now, most see the value. Insurance pressures have played a part too – especially when the market got tough. People started paying closer attention to risk and process.

There’s also a growing understanding that robust compliance protects client relationships, rather than threatens them. But that message doesn’t always land. If compliance is presented as a blocker, that’s how it will be received. It’s all in the framing.

Q: Are there still any major disconnects between compliance teams and fee-earners?

A: One of the biggest things is underestimating the cognitive load on fee-earners. These are people juggling dozens – sometimes hundreds – of active matters. Asking them to context-switch constantly between legal work and compliance tasks increases the risk of mistakes.

Firms need to think about how they structure compliance into the day-to-day – not just bombard people with piecemeal requests. Whether it’s dedicated time blocks, clearer processes, or just giving lawyers the space to finish one thing before jumping to the next, it makes a difference.

It’s also about how the message is delivered. If you tell a client, “Compliance says you need to do this,” it creates friction. But if you say, “To keep things moving, we just need a couple of documents,” the whole interaction changes. The way compliance is framed – internally and externally – really matters.

Q: Can compliance add value to legal work?

A: Absolutely. Good compliance actually strengthens service delivery. If you do your risk assessments properly, you understand your client better. That means better advice, better outcomes, and a higher chance of repeat work.

There’s also huge value in the things that don’t happen. Not taking on a risky client, avoiding a regulatory breach, catching a problem early – those are lucky escapes that often go unnoticed. But they protect the firm and the client. The challenge is showing the ROI of the thing that didn’t happen. 

It’s hard to measure, but it matters.

Q: What structural changes do you see coming?

A: The risks are getting sharper. Firms that don’t manage compliance effectively are going to struggle – not just with the SRA, but with professional indemnity insurance too. If you can’t demonstrate a robust approach, premiums go up. Or worse, you can’t get cover at all.

We’re moving into a world where compliance is existential. That means firms may need to merge, invest in new systems, or rethink how they operate to stay afloat. The regulators are getting more thorough, the fines are getting bigger, and the margin for error is shrinking. 

Q: What’s your advice for firms looking to do this well?

A: Start with leadership. If the tone from the top isn’t right, nothing else will stick. Then give fee-earners the time and structure they need – whether that’s proper time codes for compliance tasks or building it into your workflow.

Firms also need to recognise that compliance isn’t just about avoiding fines. Done well, it adds real value. It supports better decisions, stronger client relationships, and more sustainable growth. 

But to get there, you need to treat it as a core part of how your firm operates – not a side task or a necessary evil.

Final thoughts

Many thanks to Steve for such an eye-opening conversation. His perspective reinforces a key message from our research: firms that embed a culture of compliance – with the right tools, support, and leadership – will be best placed to thrive.

To dig deeper into how fee-earners are managing increasingly stringent compliance requirements, download the full report: Under pressure: how fee-earners are balancing compliance, client expectations, and growth in 2025.

‍