By Chere B. Estrin
What if the hiring question for 2026 isn’t simply, “How many associates do we take?” It’s also, “Who trains the ones we do?”
The 2026 Citi Hildebrandt Client Advisory provides a useful starting point. Its July 2025 survey projected an average first-year associate class of 109 for 2025, compared with 120 in 2024. That was broadly consistent with earlier classes: 109 in 2021, 107 in 2022 and 111 in 2023. These are figures from the report’s large-firm survey, not an average for every law firm in the country.
The more revealing finding concerns future hiring plans. Among large firms surveyed, 86% expected to increase their overall associate populations by 2027 compared with 2024, but only 35% planned to expand their first-year classes. That suggests growth with a greater emphasis on experienced associates. It does not establish that entry-level hiring is disappearing.
From a recruiting standpoint, that distinction matters. A firm can add lawyers and still face a difficult question about how it develops for the next generation.
AI changes the work. Firms must decide how training changes with it.
I cannot prove that AI caused the projected decline in first-year class size. The survey does not establish that causal relationship.
What we can document is that firms are introducing AI into legal workflows. A&O Shearman, for example, has described its use of Harvey and the development of ContractMatrix for contract drafting, review and negotiation. That is evidence of adoption, although it does not tell us how many junior positions those tools replace, if any.
As a legal staffing executive, my concern is what happens to learning when firms redesign those assignments.
Reviewing documents, comparing provisions and working through corrections can give juniors opportunities to develop judgment. The educational value comes from understanding why a provision matters, why an inconsistency changes the analysis and why a supervising attorney rejected the first draft.
If technology accelerates that work, firms can improve training. But they need to create it deliberately.
An associate who receives an AI-generated summary still needs to learn how to check it against the underlying documents, identify omissions, and explain the significance of the findings. Faster access to an answer does not demonstrate understanding.
The recruiting issue is also a management issue.
My assessment is that firms seeking more experienced associates should examine their capacity to supervise and develop juniors at the same time.
Who reviews their work? Who explains the corrections? Who gives them progressively more responsibility? And does that person have time to teach?
A capable mid-level associate may be expected to manage assignments, serve clients, review junior work, and meet demanding billing expectations. Adding training responsibilities without adjusting workload creates a foreseeable management problem.
Senior paralegals also deserve attention in that assessment. Depending on their role, they may carry substantial knowledge of case histories, discovery processes, filing requirements a,nd team workflows. The firm should recognize their contribution to teaching those processes, while attorneys retain responsibility for legal supervision.
When an experienced person leaves, a replacement may fill the position without immediately replacing that accumulated knowledge. The effect depends on the practice, the workload, and the strength of the firm’s documentation and backup coverage.
That is why retention belongs in the hiring conversation.
Hire for demonstrated capability and protect the people who develop it.
For hiring partners and firm leaders, I recommend connecting each hiring plan to a development plan:
- Identify the skills juniors must acquire as assignments change.
- Assign clear responsibility for supervision and feedback.
- Give trainers time and recognition for that work.
- Use realistic work examples to assess lateral candidates’ judgment.
- Build backup coverage for essential matter knowledge and processes.
Lateral hiring can address an immediate need. It cannot substitute indefinitely for developing people.
For associates with three to six years of experience and senior paralegals, the practical message is to make your contribution visible. Years of service alone do not establish market value. Specific practice experience, sound judgment, effective use of technology and the ability to help a team perform are more useful evidence.
Be prepared to explain what you manage, what problems you solve, and how you improve the work around you. Compensation and opportunities will still vary by location, practice area, firm, and responsibilities.
The hiring question for 2026 deserves a second sentence:
“How many associates do we need and how will we turn them into the experienced professionals we expect to hire tomorrow?”
Chere B. Estrin is CEO of Estrin Legal Staffing and a nationally recognized authority on legal careers, talent management, and law firm leadership. A former AmLaw firm administrator and senior executive with a $5 billion staffing company, she has authored 14 books and hundreds of articles on the legal profession. Her latest books include The Small and Mid-Size Law Firm Talent Playbook, published by the American Bar Association, Power Plays for Legal Professionals, and The Paralegal Job Search Handbook. She is also the publisher of The Estrin Report and has been featured in The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Forbes.com, Law360, and CBS News, among others.