Should law firms only be managed by lawyers? Rethinking leadership in professional services

Óscar Montezuma Panez
Niubox Legal Digital, Lima
omontezuma@niubox.legal

As a lawyer, a question one often grapples with is: should the person who leads a law firm always be a lawyer? It may sound provocative, but it is less about exclusion and more about evolution. It is not about removing lawyers from leadership, nor about challenging the regulatory frameworks that in many jurisdictions limit non-lawyer ownership or control. Rather, it is about recognising that law firms are complex service businesses and that managing them well often requires more than legal brilliance alone.

A recent Financial Times column by Andrew Hill titled ‘Why law firms should widen their search for leaders’ captured this tension clearly: ‘An outsider’s view is likely to foster innovation.’ His suggestion is not that lawyers should stop leading, but that firms might benefit from widening their leadership perspective to include professionals with training in areas such as strategy, finance, operations and people management.

Many firms continue to follow a traditional logic: the person who bills the most, or who has the longest tenure, should lead. And while experience and technical strength are certainly assets, they may not always be the best indicators of who can build, grow and sustain an organisation over time.

Running a law firm today requires more than reviewing contracts and advising clients. It demands strategic vision, operational discipline, strong communication, cultural leadership and sound financial management. These are areas where professionals from outside the legal field can offer deep value, if lawyers give them the space and autonomy to do so.

This is not a new idea. Other professional service sectors have long separated technical and business leadership in productive ways. In many hospitals, for example, a medical director oversees clinical standards, while a general manager, often someone with a background in administration or public health, leads the strategic and operational side of the organisation. The distinction is clear, and both roles are valued. They collaborate and complement each other.

Can law firms follow a similar model?

Some have started to. Around the world, lawyers are seeing firms bring in non-lawyer professionals, not just for operational support, but to help shape strategy and drive change. But there is still a gap: too often, these professionals are kept on the sidelines rather than integrated into real decision-making roles. They should not be there merely to ‘assist’ partners, they should be part of the leadership team. When empowered, they can help firms scale with intention, manage risk more effectively, build stronger internal systems and create healthier workplace cultures.

Of course, the path forward must respect each country’s legal and ethical frameworks. In some jurisdictions, regulations prevent non-lawyers from owning or controlling law firms. But ownership is not the only way to contribute. The kind of leadership lawyers are speaking about here is internal, operational and strategic, not necessarily through ownership (although this, too, is an interesting discussion and some jurisdictions are beginning to relax those constraints). It is about ensuring that firms are led not only by experts in the law, but also by experts in how to run organisations.

This distinction is essential. It means that even within regulatory constraints, firms can evolve, by empowering cross-functional leadership and building teams that reflect the full complexity of the business of law.

Still, for many firms, this shift may feel uncomfortable. It challenges long-held assumptions about status and hierarchy. But discomfort is often the first sign that transformation is needed.

The path to growth

Lawyers will and should continue to lead our profession. But that does not mean lawyers have to do it alone. Bringing interdisciplinary leadership does not weaken legal excellence, it enhances it. Collaborating with professionals from other fields can make our firms stronger, more agile and better prepared for what is ahead.

A well-run firm does not scale by simply adding more partners or practice areas. It scales when it understands its model, aligns around a clear strategy and manages its resources wisely.

That kind of growth is not just about volume. It is about sustainability. And sustainability often comes from the kind of management that is not taught in law school.

We already trust non-doctors to lead hospitals, non-engineers to run global tech companies and non-academics to manage top universities. Trusting non-lawyers to help lead law firms through the provision of expertise and empowered roles is not a radical idea. It is a logical step towards building more resilient, human and forward-looking organisations.

The real question is not whether lawyers should lead. It is whether lawyers are willing to share that responsibility with those who bring different expertise, and who can help lawyers lead more effectively.