When it comes to legal directory rankings, there’s no shortage of advice on drafting the perfect overview section or presenting stand-out matters. But even the most impressive write-up won’t take you far without one critical element: solid referee feedback.
It stands to reason that directories like Chambers, Legal 500, IFLR, Lexology GDE 100 and more rely on third-party validation to corroborate your claims. They aren’t just going to take your word for it, sorry. Whether it’s a client, peer, or industry contact, referee feedback stands for a significant part of the “exam marks” – with some directories, significantly more than 50%. This alone can often be the deciding factor between getting ranked or… well… not.
In this article, we’ll look at what makes a strong referee, how their feedback is used, and how to choose and manage them strategically throughout the year.
Why referees matter more than you think
You could have a team packed with talent and a case list that reads like the legal pages of The Times, but if your referees don’t respond — or worse, offer only lukewarm feedback — your rankings will suffer. Fact.
As we explain in our article Don’t Just Manage Your Referees directory submissions aren’t just a tick-box exercise. Strong, specific, relevant endorsements are essential for supporting the claims you make in the submission form. Silence, on the other hand, speaks volumes, and not in a good way.
The directories won’t chase missing referees. They won’t guess or infer. If your clients aren’t giving feedback, the assumption may be that they don’t have anything positive to say. And that can lead to disappointment when rankings are released.
What makes a good referee
Not all referees are created equal. A good referee is someone who:
- Has a strong, recent working relationship with your team
- Can speak credibly and enthusiastically about the work delivered
- Understands the impact of the directory process and is willing to engage with it
Directories typically contact referees via email and ask them to complete an online feedback form. The tone, content and strength of what they write carries real weight. Researchers aren’t just looking out for descriptions of ‘what’ you’ve done but also ‘how’ you’ve done it and what it’s like to work with you. And they’re comparing what your referees say to what you’ve claimed in the submission itself.
If you want to see exactly how researchers assess referee input, take a closer look at Don’t Just Manage Your Referees.
Who can be a referee
The short answer is, if they meet the criteria above then anyone can. However, take this with a pinch of salt. The most common referee types include:
- Clients – General Counsel, in-house teams or other key client contacts who’ve worked directly with you
- Peers – Co-counsel or lawyers from different firms who’ve collaborated on transactions or disputes
- Industry experts – Accountants, consultants or other professionals with first-hand experience of your work
Although direct client contacts are usually stronger in impact, a broader range of referees can be useful, particularly when establishing reputation or introducing new areas of work/professionals. Each directory has slightly different preferences, which is why strategic planning makes a real difference. See Don’t Just Fill in Forms for advice on aligning your submission with what researchers are really looking for.
Why getting referees right is critical
High-quality, consistent feedback can:
- Reinforce the claims you make in your submission
- Give researchers confidence that you’re delivering on your promises
- Highlight individual strengths and client service credentials
- Help secure individual rankings as well as team-wide recognition
We’ve seen plenty of examples where tight, well-managed submissions were let down by silence from referees. On the flip side, we’ve seen less-polished submissions pull ahead thanks to glowing, specific testimonials.
Referees who don’t respond, respond late or offer vague, generic feedback can give the impression that the client relationship isn’t as strong as you claimed. Worse still, if they contradict your case studies or seem confused by what you’re trying to prove, your credibility suffers.
Our article Legal 500’s NPS Report: A Reality Check for Referee Strategy explores the data behind referee performance and shows why it matters more than most firms realise.
How to choose the right referees
Choose people who know your work
It sounds obvious, but it’s so often missed. Select referees who’ve worked closely and recently with the individuals you’re putting forward. High-level contacts might like you, but if they don’t have first-hand insight, they can’t help your submission.
Don’t rely on job titles
The best referee isn’t always the top person. It’s the person who rolled up their sleeves with your team and saw the impact you delivered. Direct experience matters more than hierarchy.
Mix it up
Don’t default to the same list year after year. Diversify by client type, practice area, and geography. Think about who will support the specific narrative you\’re putting forward in each submission. And check who did and didn’t respond last year. What’s the point in including someone you thought was reliable when they, perhaps, aren’t?
Think long term
Directories aren’t just about this year’s ranking. They’re about how you show up year after year. Strong firms build relationships through regular, structured client listening. They check in, gather feedback, and identify happy, engaged clients who become natural referee candidates. Maximising Value from the Legal Directories Process explores how to embed this thinking across your firm.
Beyond selection: The importance of referee development
Choosing the right referees is only half the story. Managing them well is what drives results.
This isn’t about chasing people or pestering them with reminders. It’s about:
- Letting referees know in advance that they’ll be contacted
- Giving them a short, clear overview of what the process involves
- Reminding them of the work you did together and what to expect
- Following up – politely and at the right time – if they haven’t responded
This kind of proactive, structured approach should be part of your wider marketing and BD plan. It’s not an admin task, it’s a client care exercise. And the benefits go far beyond rankings.
If you want help building or refining this process, ELE’s legal directory submissions services can take the pressure off and help you get referee management right.
Conclusion: Choose well and manage better
If your rankings last year weren’t what you expected, ask yourself two questions: who did you name, and how did you manage them?
Referees are not just a technical requirement on a submission form. They are a critical part of the directory process. Get them right, and they become your biggest advocates. Get them wrong, and even the strongest submissions can falter.
Need a fresh perspective? Our Directories & Rankings Audit can help you take a fresh look at your referee strategy, assess what’s working and build a better approach for next time.
And if you’re keen to take the referee bull by the horns, here’s a handy checklist we’ve created, summarising the key points in this article. You can download it here.
