SurePoint Technologies’ Inaugural Partner Satisfaction Survey Reveals Complex Realities of the Non-Equity Tier

SurePoint Technologies’ first-ever Partner Satisfaction Survey, powered by Leopard Solutions, provides a rare glimpse behind the curtain of law firm partnership — and the results reveal a complex, often frustrating experience for non-equity partners across the legal market.  

From compensation dissatisfaction to unclear promotion paths, the survey captures the realities of 407 partners between May 4 and June 9, 2025, spanning both Am Law 200 firms and mid-sized law firms. 

Survey at a Glance 

Gender:

Leadership Experience:

  • 72% Male
  • 27% Female 
  • 38% currently in leadership 
  • 15% previously held leadership roles 
  • 48% never involved 

Career Path:

Lateral Movement:  

  • 84% joined after experience elsewhere 
  • Only 16% joined their firm directly from law school
  • 38% changed firms within the last five years 

Partner Breakdown:  

Am Law 200 Affiliation:

  • 61% Equity Partners 
  • 34% Non-Equity Partners 
  • 50% employed at Am Law 200 firms 

While the broader legal community often focuses on equity partners, this survey spotlights the non-equity tier — a growing, yet frequently misunderstood group within the partnership ranks. Their stories reveal a shared struggle for recognition, transparency, and fairness. 

The Am Law 200 Non-Equity Partner Experience: Prestige with a Price 

The non-equity partners from Am Law 200 law firms surveyed represent a cross-section of the market, with nearly 43% from firms ranked Am Law 31–50 and 26% from Am Law 51–100. Despite their title, nearly half (49%) reported receiving no formal training upon promotion — a signal that firms may be elevating attorneys without fully investing in their long-term success. 

Alarmingly, 39% said clients are unaware of their partner tier status, fueling internal questions about transparency and the meaning of the title itself. 

For many, non-equity status feels less like a stepping stone and more like a holding pattern. Almost a quarter (24%) describe the path to equity as “not clear at all,” and nearly 30% admit they see non-equity partnership as a long-term role — sometimes by choice, often by necessity. 

“The path to equity keeps getting longer,” one respondent shared, reflecting a broader sentiment that promotion criteria are both opaque and evolving. Others described goalposts that shift with firm politics and organizations’ requirements: 

“There is a level of originations I need to reach before I can truly consider myself on track for equity.” 

“When I joined, I was told I’d make equity in a year — then the firm reneged.” 

While partnership has historically promised financial security, many non-equity partners have expressed dissatisfaction with their compensation. 

  • 21% are outright dissatisfied with compensation 
  • 33% feel pay fails to reflect their contributions 
  • 48% cite ‘originations’ as the dominant pay driver 
  • 38% earn only slightly more than senior associates 

Bonus structures often favor equity partners, further widening the gap. As one partner put it: 

“Paying taxes for equity partners in other states, with no idea if or how I’ll ever make equity.”

“The firm’s low base/high bonus model sounds good, but pay degrades year over year.”  

The survey paints a stark picture of governance dynamics. A staggering 77% say only equity partners hold voting power, and 38% feel that non-equity partners have no meaningful role in decision-making.  

This exclusion has tangible consequences:

  • 12% believe firm decisions rarely align with their values 
  • 61% would likely leave if values and decisions conflicted 

The sentiment is clear:  

“Being required to bill like an associate but do far more non-billable work.”

“Equity partners get concierge-level support; non-equity partners don’t.”   

Non-equity status is increasingly seen as a hybrid role — expected to produce like partners, yet often lacking support, leadership training, or clear advancement pathways. Structural ambiguity has real consequences: 

“AI will blow up the BigLaw model faster than most think.” 

“Non-equity partners are squeezed between equity and associates on pay — and it shows.” 

The result? High-achieving lawyers are caught between expectation and reality, feeling the strain of heavy responsibilities without the full rewards of partnership. 

While mid-sized firms may offer a different scale, non-equity partners there face many of the same challenges — with some unique twists. 

Roughly 30% say the path to equity is unclear, and only 32% view non-equity as a true stepping stone. Many report that equity is effectively reserved for founders or select insiders: 

“Everyone is ‘equity’ but not full equity. It’s a game.” 

“It was meant to be a stepping stone, but this has not ended up being a reality.” 

“It’s a small firm and only the founders have equity. They may want more equity partners, but it’s unclear how I could even get in.” 

In some cases, non-equity status reflects a step backward, not forward: 

“It was a demotion from equity partner.” 

Mid-sized firm partners report striking pay inequities: 

  • Over 30% are dissatisfied with compensation 
  • 56% believe their pay doesn’t reflect their contributions 
  • 52% earn only slightly more, or about the same, as senior associates 
  • 43% receive reduced or no performance bonuses tied to origination 

Behind the numbers lies frustration with firm politics and the mechanics of origination credit: 

“It’s all politics. People succeed by others sharing origination credit with them, even if they don’t originate anything.” 

“Bonuses were reduced, then billable hours increased with a warning that higher pay means more hours.” 

For many, the disconnect between effort, contribution, and compensation is pushing them to seek opportunities elsewhere. 

Non-equity partners in mid-sized firms feel similarly sidelined from firm governance: 

  • 81% say only equity partners vote 
  • 47% report no meaningful involvement in decisions 
  • Over 70% feel firm decisions rarely align with their values 

The emotional toll is real:  

“You feel disenfranchised. You have very little say, as if no one cares about your input.” 

Structural uncertainty and economic pressures are eroding morale: 

“Trying to juggle client relationships, mentoring, and billing while feeling unable to advance in life — partnership, savings, and home ownership seem out of reach.” 

“Even here, it doesn’t seem promising.” 

Younger partners especially express concern over mental health, stagnant career prospects, and a future that feels increasingly uncertain.

Where Firms Go From Here 

  1. Establish transparent and consistent promotion criteria 
    Define clear benchmarks for advancement and communicate them firmwide. 
  1. Implement fair, merit-based compensation systems
    Tie partner compensation to measurable contributions rather than internal politics. 
  1. Develop authentic leadership pathways for non-equity partners
    Create structured training and mentorship programs to support long-term growth. 
  1. Include partners in governance and strategic decision-making
    Ensure broader participation in firm leadership to foster engagement and trust. 

For both Am Law 200 and mid-sized firms, the message is clear: The non-equity partner experience is critical to firm stability, culture, and future success. Without meaningful change, firms risk eroding engagement, losing top talent, and fueling a cycle of dissatisfaction that extends far beyond title alone. 

Watch our recent webinar, 2025 Partner Satisfaction Survey Results, where a panel of industry experts dives deeper into the survey findings.

Get started today