Julian Taylor, Senior Partner of Simmons & Simmons, joined the firm in 1999 from the Bar and became a partner in 2003. A specialist in employment and incentives law, he has advised many of the firm’s key clients on complex workplace and governance issues.
Before being elected Senior Partner, he led both the global and UK employment practices, helping to shape the firm’s reputation for innovation and people-focused leadership. In this interview, Julian discusses leadership, AI’s impact on the profession, the future of law firm culture and how adaptability will define success in the decade ahead.
Q: You’ve been with Simmons & Simmons for over 20 years, rising from employment lawyer to Senior Partner. How has that background shaped the way you lead the firm?
Julian Taylor: I actually joined in 1999, so it’s been about 26 years now, a long time. I think two things have been particularly helpful. Firstly, having been here for so long, I’ve really come to know the people, the culture, and many of our clients. That familiarity gives me a good understanding of expectations, what people like, dislike and what tends to work. When you’re in a leadership position trying to drive any sort of change, those relationships and insights are invaluable. You know which levers work and which ones make a bad noise when you pull them.
Secondly, my background as an employment lawyer has been useful because that discipline is so people-orientated. The human side is a huge part of the Senior Partner role, both in dealing with our own people internally and in engaging with clients and the wider market.
Q: Your term as Senior Partner runs until 2027. What are your main priorities for the firm over the next few years?
Julian Taylor: When I look at the market, it often feels like there’s a sea of sameness. A lot of international firms look and sound very similar. At Simmons, we genuinely are quite different, but I don’t think we’ve always made enough noise about that. So one of my key aims is to strengthen and articulate a more distinctive identity in the market. I’d like us to be even more clearly recognised for who we are and what we stand for by 2027.
There are several ways in which we’re different. From what we hear from clients, we’ve been ahead of many peers in relation to AI. We’ve won awards for our internal AI tool, Percy, which we developed ourselves, and we have a market-leading team providing AI-related advice to clients. Our progress in this area is indicative of a genuinely innovative culture, we’re always looking to challenge how we do things and to find what’s best from the client’s perspective, even if that’s very different from how things were done in the past.
Another point of difference is our international network. Many firms are scaling down globally, particularly in parts of Asia or Europe, often narrowing their geographic focus in pursuit of higher short-term profits. By contrast, we’ve doubled down on our international footprint. Our clients consistently tell us that our ability to provide a high-quality, consistent service across multiple regions is one of the things they value most. So continuing to invest in and grow that network remains a big priority.
And finally, culture. I want Simmons to remain a firm where people are genuinely proud to work. Of course, we want to reward our people well, but we also value much more than money. In a market increasingly driven by financial metrics, we’re proud to maintain a culture that prizes collaboration, respect, and balance as well as excellence.
Q: With your experience in employment and incentives, how are trends like hybrid working and AI changing the type of advice clients need?
Julian Taylor: I’m not sure hybrid working has changed the type of advice dramatically. Early on, when remote working first took hold, some organisations were concerned about how to monitor staff working from home. But we live in such a digital world now that most of what people do can be carefully tracked through technology.
What’s perhaps more relevant is how organisations maintain the connectivity and cohesion that come from face-to-face interaction. Since the pandemic, we’ve seen many clients trying to encourage more in-office attendance for precisely that reason.
Where we’ve seen the biggest spike in advice requests is definitely in relation to technology, particularly AI. We’re advising clients on both its use and its misuse. It’s increasingly being used in recruitment and people management, which creates new employment and ethical questions. There are also issues around AI governance and how employees are using AI within their business operations. Sometimes it’s used successfully; sometimes it crosses lines that create risks.
One of the big challenges is that we operate in a global economy, yet regulation of AI is regional. There’s no universal framework for how AI should be regulated. And that inconsistency creates real complexity for multinational clients.
Another issue is the sheer pace of change. Regulation is constantly trying to catch up with technology, and that’s difficult in itself. AI evolves every month, and lawyers, regulators, and businesses are all racing to keep up.
Q: You’ve said you don’t expect AI to lead to big job losses in law. Why do you take that view?
Julian Taylor: It’s true that some of the work currently done by trainees and junior lawyers will eventually be handled by AI. But that doesn’t mean we won’t need those people. What I hope for is a future where they’re doing different kinds of work, moving up the value chain.
We’ll still need to train them, and they’ll need to understand what the technology is doing. But I think law firms historically haven’t always stretched their junior people enough. If you compare it to medicine, junior doctors are on the front line making life-and-death decisions early on. In law, we’ve sometimes tried to protect our junior lawyers too much and not given them enough client exposure. AI gives us an opportunity to rethink that.
It would also be dangerous for firms to cut numbers drastically. Where would the next generation of partners come from? We need that pipeline of talent.
Interestingly, client attitudes have shifted. A year ago, many clients asked us to confirm that we hadn’t used AI in producing advice, because they worried about reliability and confidentiality. Now, the question is often the opposite, they want confirmation that we have used AI, because people often value the quality and efficiency gains that come with it. There’s greater confidence in the governance around AI, but clients still want human involvement. They don’t want total reliance on machines; they want reassurance that humans are checking and overseeing what AI does.
So, yes, AI will change the type of work people do, but it won’t eliminate the need for people. Quite the opposite, actually: it will make human judgment and oversight more valuable.
Q: You’ve also noted that AI could change how firms charge for their work. What shifts do you expect in pricing and value for clients?
Julian Taylor: Ours has been a strange profession for quite some time—very focused on input rather than output. The billable hour has driven not just how clients are charged, but also how lawyers are rewarded and assessed internally.
As AI becomes more embedded, that model will have to evolve. We’ll move towards a greater focus on outcomes, based on the value and impact of what we create for clients. AI will enable us to solve complex problems much faster, sometimes almost instantly. In those cases, it simply won’t make sense to charge purely on a time-taken basis.
We’ll need more sophisticated pricing models that reflect the quality and value of the output rather than the number of hours recorded. And I think that shift could actually be positive for the profession’s mental health. Historically, the emphasis on long hours hasn’t always been healthy. If we can move to a model that rewards the quality of what people produce rather than how long they spend at their desks, that will be good for everyone, clients included.
It’s also about fairness. If you have a brilliant lawyer who uses AI effectively to deliver exceptional work quickly, it would be wrong to charge simply based on time. The value they create should be recognised, both in how they’re rewarded internally and how the client is billed.
Q: Some argue that as technology takes over certain tasks, human connection becomes even more important. Do you agree?
Julian Taylor: Absolutely. In a world of hybrid working and constant screen time, it’s easy for genuine social connection to be lost. The pandemic showed us just how much we miss when we don’t have that human interaction.
We need to be deliberate about maintaining it, spending real face time with colleagues and clients, not just video calls. It’s a richer, more rewarding experience. You develop deeper relationships, and that makes work more fulfilling and effective. I certainly find that seeing someone in person is far more uplifting than speaking through a screen.
Q: You’ve long supported flexibility and work-life balance. How has that influenced Simmons’ culture and approach to hybrid working?
Julian Taylor: I’ve always found “work-life balance” a tricky phrase because it implies there’s some perfect equilibrium, and I’m not sure anyone really achieves that. Most of us find the balance swings one way or the other at different times. But what’s important, and what’s very much part of our culture, is recognising that while people work incredibly hard, they also need to have a life outside work.
That’s crucial not just for wellbeing but for effectiveness. If all you do is work and sleep, you’re not going to be very productive or engaging. You need outside experiences to bring energy and perspective into your work.
I was fortunate that Simmons supported me when I made a request back in 2005 to work flexibily. That was quite unusual then, especially for a man, and I felt lucky to be in an environment where I had the confidence to make that request and where it was accepted. Too often people worry about how such requests will be received.
When I stood for election as Senior Partner, several colleagues assumed I’d return to 100%. I said no, that if they wanted me to take on the role, it would still be on a 90% basis. I wanted to send a clear message that even at the most senior level, you can do things differently.
About ten years ago, we also introduced one day a week of home working in the UK. That meant when the pandemic hit, the transition to full remote working was relatively smooth, because everyone already knew how to log on and work effectively from home.
For me, flexibility has always been an integral part of our culture. We value hard work, but we also value life beyond work.
Q: As someone with a background in both law and technology, what changes would you like to see in how future lawyers are trained?
Julian Taylor: I’m encouraged by how many law schools are now building technology and AI modules into their degree programmes. That’s hugely important. The successful lawyers of the future will be adept at using technology.
They don’t all need to be coders, but they do need to understand what coders can achieve and how technology can be applied. At the very least, they should be comfortable using AI tools themselves. Many of our lawyers already use AI multiple times a day as a companion to their work.
Equally, they need to be open to collaborating with data scientists and technologists to build new tools and approaches for clients. Adaptability is key. The pace of change is so fast that being willing to learn and do things differently will be one of the most valuable skills a lawyer can have.
And it’s not just about lawyers. The law firm of the future will be multidisciplinary. One of the things I was keen to do when I became Senior Partner was to open up our partnership to professionals from different backgrounds. So our partnership now includes not only lawyers but also others with complementary skills. Next year we’re launching an AI internship programme targeted specifically at data scientists, which I think is a great step.
We talk a lot about diversity, and we’ve made good progress, especially around gender, with a female Managing Partner and a female Head of the UK. But diversity also means diversity of thought and skill set. In a world increasingly dominated by technology, our people’s careers will be secure as long as they can adapt and make technology their ally. If they shy away from it, they’ll struggle.
Q: Looking ahead, what do you think will set successful law firms apart over the next decade?
Julian Taylor: I think some law firms will fail, possibly even some significant names. The pace of change we’re facing is unprecedented. Law firms are resilient businesses, many have been around for over a century, but we’ve never experienced transformation at this speed.
One thing the profession isn’t good at is long-term planning. We tend to focus on the current financial year, but that short-termism is dangerous. If all that matters is this year’s bottom line, you’ll never make the changes needed to thrive five years from now.
The firms that succeed will be the ones that can look beyond the horizon, investing in technology, in their people, and in adapting to new ways of working. They’ll balance financial performance with long-term sustainability.
Clients, too, are changing. They want firms that embrace technology intelligently, that deliver real value rather than just more hours, and that maintain integrity and human connection while doing so. Those that get that balance right will be the winners in the next decade.
Copyright & permissions
b89ee.jpg&w=3840&q=60)
