The SQE and firms' recruitment

The SRA's consultation on assessment for the solicitor qualification closed on 4 March. Firms need to be aware of the implications for their training arrangements.

The proposal is that there should be a single Solicitors Qualification Examination (SQE) run by the SRA which will determine whether or not an individual can qualify. The SQE will be in two parts: the first testing knowledge (broadly, the law degree); the second, which can only be taken after the first has been passed, skills (broadly, a combination of LPC and training contract). It's likely that people will be able to take various modules separately, whenever they like. No account is taken of proxies, such as law degrees; law students are going to be tested twice.

The proposal addresses concerns about the perceived differences in value of different degrees and LPCs, and about the fact that hardly anybody ever fails to complete a training contract satisfactorily. A single examination for everyone ought to ensure a consistent minimum standard.

And if it does, how do people got there? Could a candidate could just turn up to the exams without any prescribed training? The SRA is still thinking about this. It wants to keep some work-based training before qualification but doesn't know whether it should be monitored. It doesn't think a degree should be compulsory and it's unlikely that the full LPC will be required - perhaps some compulsory individual modules, but no more.

So aspiring solicitors, in theory, will have more choice about how they get the skills and knowledge needed to pass the SQE. The paper optimistically suggests that, with greater market freedom, the price of training should fall and quality improve. People from disadvantaged backgrounds should be able to find cheaper, more flexible ways of qualifying. Except that the requirement for work-based experience is likely to continue the bottleneck caused by training contracts (presumably two years photocopying won't be enough). And firms' views about what they want their future solicitors to know will still be crucial.

So what are the implications for firms? Let's assume that firms still want to train at least some people to get the solicitor qualification: they'll still need people to do reserved work and the qualification is still a selling point for clients and, indeed, for bright students looking for a professional career.

The plans seem likely to give firms both less and more control. Less control because firms will no longer determine whether or not a trainee qualifies. However, unless they are simply going to recruit from people who have turned up and passed the exams, they are going to have to decide what processes their aspiring solicitors go through in order to pass the SQE - decisions that, themselves, will be second guessed by the SQE.

For Part I of the SQE, those that want a graduate intake can probably rely on the universities and the GDL - though they'll probably want to make offers conditional on passing it. Those with apprentices or non-graduate intakes will probably find that the training market develops part-time offers geared to those students.

The difficulty comes with the remainder. Part II covers everything that solicitors are expected to learn from the LPC and the training contract. Firms are going to have to work out how they ensure that trainees have the knowledge to pass it.

I've often thought that you could probably get most of the skills taught on the LPC from decent in-house training. However, training someone to meet your firms' requirements is very different from training them to pass an external examination, particularly in the first few years where there will be uncertainty about exactly how it is implemented in practice. I suspect that firms will want outside help. The question will be whether simply to sub-contract the whole job or to try a more bespoke approach where the provider's training and the firm's own programme are matched.

One thing is certain. There will be a bewildering variety of providers anxious to help. Expensive, bespoke courses, specialised modules on individual subjects, glorified crammers, reminiscent of the old Law Society finals, are all l likely to be on offer. There may even be a few courses which look very like extended LPCs.

It may be that the solicitors market has become so diverse and the training options so varied that the days of a single homogenous training course have gone: a single exam may be preferable to a compulsory course. But the SRA is in danger of creating a vacuum here that will confuse both students and firms.

I've no idea whether the SQE will be a useful qualification or a tiresome, largely irrelevant hurdle. The changes, however, give firms an opportunity to look at what they need themselves in order to give their trainees the most effective start. I suspect that it's going to be down to firms to make their requirements clear and to work closely with the training providers themselves. The changes are due to commence in 2017. There'll be a lot of scurrying between now and then. Firms need to get their voices heard.

By Mark Stobbs, former director of legal policy, The Law Society