When firms talk to us about legal directory submissions, the focus is usually on drafting. How strong are the work highlights? Is the overview compelling? Are the right matters included?
Everyone knows that the referees are important theoretically… but they still seem to slip down the priority list in favour of the submission itself.
The reality is that for directories such as Chambers and Legal 500, referee feedback accounts for a substantial part of the “exam marks”. If the feedback is strong and specific it can reinforce your case for ranking at both a departmental and individual level. If referees stay silent, however… respond late, or offer vague comments, you’re going to struggle, no matter how brilliant your written submission document.
The challenge is that many firms treat referees as an administrative step rather than a strategic one. They fill in the spreadsheet, send it off, and hope for the best. In our experience, however, it merits rather more attention and strategic planning.
Why referees matter more than most firms realise
You may be surprised to hear that the researchers are not simply taking your submission at face value. They want to hear from people who have worked with you. Reputable individuals that can confirm the quality, impact and reliability of your work.
Strong referee feedback should:
- Reinforce the claims made in your submission
- Give researchers confidence in the strength of your practice
- Highlight individual lawyers and client service credentials
- Support both team and individual rankings
We discuss this in more detail in our article Who you name matters: how to choose and manage referees for legal directory success
Choosing the right referees
A good referee is someone who:
- Has worked closely with your team
- Has recent, first-hand experience of the work delivered
- Is likely to respond when contacted
- Can speak credibly about the impact of your work
A common mistake is choosing referees based on seniority or prestige. A senior contact at a global client may look impressive on paper, but if they do not respond, their name carries no weight.
In practice, the best referees are often people who worked closely with you over the last 12 months (and in that respect are often more junior individuals) and will talk clearly about what you did and the experience of working with you.
Referees don’t always have to be clients
Another misconception is that referees must always be clients. In reality, directories are open to a wider range of voices, provided they have credible experience of your work.
Possible referees can include:
- In-house lawyers who worked with you
- Counsel or barristers involved in the matter
- Lawyers from other firms on the same side of a transaction or dispute
- Industry professionals such as consultants or accountants
- Other professional contacts with direct knowledge of your work
The key question is simple: can they speak knowledgeably about your work in the past 12–18 months? And if you know they’re going to respond then stick them down.
Confidential matters? Referees matter even more
For some practices, particularly investigations, regulatory work or private client matters, confidentiality can limit what you can say in your submission.
In those situations, referees become even more important.
When the matter itself cannot be fully described, researchers rely on referee feedback to understand the scale, complexity and significance of the work you do. This doesn’t mean they’re going to have to talk about confidential information but a well-placed comment from someone involved in the matter can help the researcher to understand overarching value and experience, without the need for confidential information.
Our article Getting referees right – even when everything’s confidential covers this in more detail.
Managing referees is just as important as choosing them
Selecting the right referees is only part of the job. How you communicate with them can make a significant difference to response rates and the quality of feedback.
Good practice includes:
- Letting referees know in advance that they will be contacted
- Briefing them on what the process involves
- Reminding them of the work you did together
- Encouraging them to watch for emails from the directories
- Following up politely if they have not responded
Too often firms add referees to the spreadsheet and leave it there. Yet, a small amount of proactive communication can significantly improve the chances of meaningful feedback.
We discuss this approach in more detail in Don’t just manage your referees.
A practical checklist for getting referees right
To help firms approach this process more strategically, we have created a short checklist covering the key questions to ask before submitting your referees.
It includes practical steps such as:
- confirming referees have recent, first-hand experience of your work
- prioritising contacts who are likely to respond
- ensuring you use the available referee slots effectively
- briefing referees before the research period begins
- monitoring responses and following up appropriately
You can download the checklist here.
It sets out the key stages of the referee process and helps ensure your referees are strategically selected, well briefed and positioned to support your submission effectively.
If you would like help reviewing your referee strategy or improving how your firm manages the process, get in touch with us or take a look at our Legal Directories Hub for more practical guidance.
