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
Total Respondents: 407
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
Demographics & Structural Gaps
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.
A Murky Path to Equity
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.”
Compensation Frustrations Run Deep
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.”
Power, Participation, and the Illusion of Influence
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.”
Cultural Pressures & Uncertain Futures
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.
The Mid-Sized Firm Non-Equity Landscape: Frustration, Politics, and Limited Prospects
While mid-sized firms may offer a different scale, non-equity partners there face many of the same challenges — with some unique twists.
Path to Equity: Subjective, Inconsistent, and Often Elusive
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.”
Compensation & Originations: A System Breeding Discontent
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.
Governance Gaps and Marginalization
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.”
Cultural Tensions & Mental Health Pressures
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
Recommended Actions
- Establish transparent and consistent promotion criteria
Define clear benchmarks for advancement and communicate them firmwide.
- Implement fair, merit-based compensation systems
Tie partner compensation to measurable contributions rather than internal politics.
- Develop authentic leadership pathways for non-equity partners
Create structured training and mentorship programs to support long-term growth.
- 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.
