By: Suzanne Donnels | Suzanne Donnels Consulting
Law firm mergers are accelerating. Clients need to know what will change, what may not, and what to ask before the transition is already underway.
When a law firm announces a merger, clients are promised broader reach, deeper expertise, better technology, and more coordinated service. Those benefits are possible, but they are not automatic. A merger brings together people, cultures, systems, incentives, and long-standing relationships, often under intense time pressure. The question for clients is not whether the combination looks compelling on paper, but whether the firm can actually convert greater scale into a better day-to-day experience.
I saw that gap firsthand when a firm I worked for acquired a smaller firm. One group of partners integrated successfully into the larger organization. But another resisted, skipping practice meetings, guarding client relationships, and leaving after their guarantees expired. The lesson was clear: strategic logic does not create an integrated firm. Execution does, and clients feel the difference.
Increased merger activity is giving more clients reason to ask that question. Fairfax Associates recorded 50 completed U.S.-connected law firm mergers in 2024, 59 in 2025, and 58 through the first three quarters of 2026. The volume is only part of the story. Several large combinations are creating new global platforms, making consolidation a durable feature of the legal market rather than an occasional event.
In just one month, June 2026, Ashurst merged with Perkins Coie to create a globally integrated firm, and Winston & Strawn and Taylor Wessing’s UK business announced a transatlantic combination under the Winston Taylor name. The 2026 Citi Hildebrandt Client Advisory reported that one in five large firms considered some form of acquisition. Clients should therefore expect merger-related change to become more common across their outside counsel portfolios. One general counsel, speaking to Chambers in 2026, put it plainly: “Law firm mergers are making good mid-market counsel harder to find. My company is going to lean towards a more efficient firm.”
Clients do not need to assess the economics behind every combination. They do need the firm to explain, in practical terms, how greater scale will improve service, protect important relationships, and create measurable value.
Distraction Central: What Clients Experience During a Merger
Mergers are rarely a combination of equals. One firm typically has more influence over the combined organization’s leadership, systems, and operating model, while the other must adapt to those decisions. For some clients, that can mean new matter and client numbers, revised billing processes, migrated outside counsel guidelines, new conflict considerations, and unfamiliar administrative requirements. Each transition may appear minor on its own, but together they create inconvenience, frustration, and room for error.
Where the firms share clients, the conversations can be more difficult. The practical questions are immediate: Who is my relationship partner now? Will my matter team remain intact? Will billing structures or rates change? For example, a client whose incumbent firm historically took a more measured approach to rate increases may reasonably fear that approach may shift after the combination.
The disruption extends beyond billing and staffing. Behind the scenes, firms must consolidate client-specific products, programs, reporting arrangements and other tailored commitments that clients may never see directly but still depend upon. Without deliberate transition plans, these commitments may fall through the cracks.
Strong integration is what gives clients a clear path through change and helps minimize disruption. Without it, the impact can be significant. When Stroock & Stroock & Lavan dissolved in 2023 after failed merger talks and partner departures, clients were left to move matters and relationships to firms they had not selected. More recently, Weil, Gotshal & Manges decided to wind-down after merger talks collapsed, alongside options including a last-minute merger or a smaller standalone firm. For clients, the uncertainty highlights the importance of contingency planning to protect active matters and key relationships. Even in successful combinations, clients benefit from early clarity about partner transitions, system changes, service priorities, and the timing of decisions that could affect active matters.
Geography is Easy. Integration is Hard.
A strong merger can expand what a firm offers clients, from broader reach to deeper benches and better technology. But many firms marketed as international or global are not truly a single integrated firm. They may operate through separate partnerships or member entities, with different governance, financial structures, systems, and client responsibilities. The client question is whether the combined organization can deliver one coordinated experience across all the new offices as those advantages only create value when they show up in the client experience.
Consider an M&A partner in San Francisco who has spent years referring work to a trusted firm in Singapore and receiving business in return. After a merger gives the partner’s own firm a Singapore office, the internal option may look obvious on an organization chart. In practice, the partner is being asked to redirect client work away from a proven relationship to colleagues who have not yet earned the same confidence or created the same reciprocal value. The partner also carries the client risk. As one general counsel explained at a recent roundtable, she relies on her chosen counsel to vet referral firms: “They've provided the referral. If they do really bad work, then it's on them for referring me to them.” Unless the combined firm deliberately builds trust, aligns incentives, and demonstrates that the new office can serve the client as well or better, geographic reach alone will not change referral behavior.
KPMG’s 2026 merger playbook makes the point directly: a merger is a vehicle for executing strategy, not the strategy itself. Execution determines whether value is created or lost.
Clients Need a Seat at the Table
The strongest integrations put clients at the center and are designed to protect continuity. Before exploring a combination, firms should understand what their clients need, where service gaps exist, and whether a merger is the right way to address them. When clients are involved from the outset and see that their advice has shaped the decision and integration plan, they are more likely to understand and tolerate the inevitable disruption that follows. Law firms already apply this principle in successful lateral recruitment by asking clients which lawyers they respect and believe would be a strong fit. The same approach can guide the search for a merger partner.
Putting clients first also requires firms to plan for integration long before a merger partner is identified. Merger discussions are often highly confidential, which means the professionals responsible for clients, communications, technology, talent, finance, and operations may not be brought in until the announcement is imminent. By then, the firm is working against a closing deadline, and there is little time to anticipate client concerns, align systems, or establish clear responsibilities. If mergers are part of a firm's growth strategy, it should develop an integration framework before a partner is ever selected. That preparation can then be adapted to the particular partner and circumstances, allowing the firm to act quickly without improvising the client experience under pressure.
I saw the value of this approach at a firm that opened a London office by assembling a team of lawyers locally. Before making the move, the firm asked its top clients whether a London presence would benefit them. Once the office opened, integration was treated as a firmwide responsibility rather than a task for the new office alone. Every partner was expected to contribute to its success. Clear integration goals were established, progress was measured, and successes were celebrated across the firm.
Troutman Pepper Locke offers a strong model for how client input can guide integration. After its combination, the firm used more than 200 client interviews and surveys to inform integration decisions and preserve what clients valued most. A separate integration analysis reported that 86% of its top 100 clients were being served by lawyers from both legacy firms within the first year, a measurable indicator of successful integration.
Six Questions Law Firms Should Be Prepared to Answer
Before clients have to ask, firms should be ready with clear answers to six questions:
- Who will remain accountable for our relationship and active matters? Be clear about the relationship partner, matter leads, escalation path, and any anticipated staffing changes.
- What will change in the first 90 days? Provide a practical timeline for billing, matter numbers, conflicts, outside counsel guidelines, reporting, technology, and other administrative changes.
- What will remain protected? Identify service standards, pricing arrangements, reporting commitments, and client-specific programs that will continue.
- How will conflicts and confidentiality be managed? Explain any new conflicts, information barriers, or limitations affecting existing or future matters.
- Where will the merger create value? Move beyond generic claims about scale and identify the specific capabilities, market access, technology, or efficiencies that should improve the client’s experience.
- How will we know whether it is working? Establish a check-in schedule and a small set of measures around service, responsiveness, relationships, and value.
A merger may be a smart move for a firm, but clients determine whether its promise becomes real. The firms that perform best will protect continuity, explain changes early, invite clients to shape the transition, and measure success through better service and stronger outcomes.
Clients who ask the right questions early can help turn a disruptive event into a more deliberate, accountable transition. That is not simply good integration. It is good client experience.
About the Author
Suzanne Donnels is the Founder of Suzanne Donnels Consulting, a strategic advisory firm for law firms and legal technology companies undergoing growth and transformation. She works with law firm leaders, business development teams, and legal tech partners to translate insight into action, strengthen client relationships, and drive measurable growth. A former Chief Marketing and Business Development Officer for leading firms in Canada and the United States, Suzanne brings more than three decades of experience in legal marketing, client development, technology, and strategy. She is a Fellow of the College of Law Practice Management, a long-standing Legal Marketing Association leader and contributor, and a frequent speaker on AI, business development, client intelligence, trust-building, and the evolving role of legal marketers as strategic advisors.
