Marco Imperiale, founder and managing director of Better Ipsum and president of the Wellbeing and Mental Health Committee of UIA International, joined us this week and talked about the mounting pressures facing today’s legal professionals. Drawing from his experience as a former Biglaw lawyer now focused on legal wellbeing, Imperiale provided candid insights into the psychological and structural challenges that make the legal profession uniquely demanding.

The Lawyer’s Brain: Wired for Pessimism

Imperiale opened with a striking observation about the fundamental nature of lawyers thinking. Citing research by Martin Seligman from over two decades ago, he revealed that pessimists consistently outperform optimists in law school—the opposite of findings in other disciplines like biology, chemistry, and engineering.

“When we look at a contract, we think about everything that can go wrong,” Imperiale explained. “It’s not a case that law firms don’t have R&D departments because R&D presumes that out of ten projects, nine are not going well. This idea of failure is in contrast with the overachievement mentality.”

This creates a fundamental tension within the profession. Lawyers are trained to identify problems and think defensively, yet they operate in environments that demand constant high performance and perfectionism. The contradiction between natural pessimistic thinking and the pressure to overachieve creates what Imperiale described as a “perfect storm” of stress factors.

Understanding the Stress Environment

The discussion highlighted the inherently individualistic nature of legal culture, despite firms’ emphasis on teamwork. Imperiale noted the competitive structure begins in law school with grade curves that pit students against each other, continuing through career progression where lawyers often move between firms with their client portfolios.

“Even the structure of most law firms, especially in continental Europe, the idea of jumping from one law firm to another and bringing your portfolio of clients with you means only one thing—that you are not sharing the clients with the others,” Imperiale observed. This creates what he described as an environment of “insecure over-achievers” where professional brand attraction (ie. Biglaw) often masks deeper cultural problems.

He suggested innovative solutions, drawing from Harvard MBA programmes where groups receive collective grades rather than individual assessments. Imagine a mentoring programme that is not for a single lawyer, but for a group of lawyers, and all these lawyers can progress to partnership collectively rather than competing against each other.

Managing Workload and Expectations

Beyond individual psychology and competitive structures, practical workload management emerged as a critical stress factor. Imperiale emphasised that the issue isn’t necessarily the total hours worked, but the unpredictability and uneven distribution of work.

“There are some days you don’t have nothing to do, and there are some days basically you’ve got to stay in the office until 3:00 AM. That’s very stressful,” he explained. “Working on the workload so that everybody has more or less the same amount of hours and the same amount of opportunities” represents a concrete step firms can take.

Transforming Stress and Connecting to Purpose

Drawing on research by Kelly McGonigal, Imperiale highlighted the importance of how stress is framed within firm culture. Rather than viewing late nights and intense pressure as unavoidable suffering, firms could present these challenges as growth opportunities.

“If law firms can relate the billable hour model or the 2:00 AM or the all-nighters in the office as a way you can grow as a professional, you can grow as a human being, as a way to improve your partnership with the client—and not something that you’ve got to do because everybody did it before you—that would be a great way to improve,” he suggested.

The AI Challenge and Career Evolution

The conversation addressed how artificial intelligence is reshaping legal practice, creating additional stress for professionals already dealing with traditional pressures. Imperiale noted that AI demands a mindset shift toward experimentation and acceptable failure—precisely the opposite of lawyers’ perfectionist training.

“This revolution is asking us to fail, to prototype, to go for tentatives. And if you are a backward-thinking professional that is a perfectionist, that’s exactly the opposite of what the world is asking you,” he observed.

The practical implications are already visible, with large firms reducing junior lawyer positions as AI handles routine work previously assigned to trainees. This creates additional pressure on remaining junior lawyers who face higher expectations despite potentially receiving £200,000 salaries with 2,000+ billable hour requirements.

Practical Strategies for Junior Lawyers

When Gannon asked specifically about junior lawyers managing these pressures, Imperiale emphasised the critical importance of information gathering before joining any firm. He quoted Benjamin Disraeli: “The most successful men—and I would add the most successful women as well—are the ones with access to the best information.”

His practical advice included:

• Research firm culture thoroughly before accepting offers
• Speak directly with current partners and associates
• Don’t be swayed purely by brand prestige
• Consider making a “contract with yourself” about duration and learning goals
• Remember that prestigious brands may not provide the best training environment

“Don’t be attracted too much by the brand, sometimes a small law firm with someone who is really willing to teach you how to be a great lawyer may be the best possible environment.”

Taking Control: Personal Wellbeing Approaches

Recognising that systemic change remains unlikely, Imperiale focused on practical individual strategies. He advocated for incremental improvements rather than dramatic lifestyle changes, comparing the approach to marathon training where runners increase distance by only 10% each week.

Perhaps most importantly, he stressed the need for self-awareness through tracking basic health metrics. “What I notice in lawyers is that most of the time they’re not aware—they’re good in terms of time sheets, but if you’re asking them about their diet, about their sleep, about their feelings, they’re just, ‘Oh, I never track this kind of stuff.'”

Understanding the Business Case for Change

The discussion acknowledged that meaningful wellbeing improvements in law firms will likely be driven by economic rather than humanitarian concerns. Imperiale observed that equity partners “only understand money—how much can I earn and how much can I save?”

However, this creates opportunities for change when wellbeing can be quantified economically. Associate burnout creates costs through recruitment, training, and reputational damage with clients who see constant staff turnover. When firms can connect wellbeing initiatives to client satisfaction and profitability, change becomes more likely.

Conclusion

The combination of self-awareness, careful firm selection, boundary-setting, and incremental health improvements offers a practical path forward. Rather than accepting overwhelming stress as inevitable, lawyers can take control through conscious choices about their work environment, personal habits, and professional development.

The message for legal professionals is clear: while the profession’s structural pressures may persist, individuals who invest in their wellbeing—through strategic career planning, self-monitoring, and gradual lifestyle improvements—can build more sustainable and fulfilling legal careers. As Imperiale noted, the awareness itself often becomes “a eureka moment” that enables lasting positive change.