b'Local Government Lawyer 7heads of legal who took part in the research,Figure 5: In which areas of work would you be MOST likely to use private practice? (rank up just under a third (32%) are currently partto five in order)of some form of shared legal service (FIG 9). However, relatively few (just 5%) look setRegeneraon/economic development 66%to join them and 7% of respondents haveProcurement and contracts 59%already left or dissolved their shared servicePlanning 44%arrangements. We tried shared workingProperty/asset management 39%with another local authority under a SLAPFI/PPP and projects 39%but it is never as good as having your ownEmployment maers 32%in-house team, said one. Judicial Review 29%In the past year or so, the shared legalWaste and environment 24%service between Barking and Dagenham andLigaon and Enforcement 15%Thurrock Councils has ended, Surrey hasConstuonal/administrave law/standards 12%left the Orbis Partnership with East Sussex,Child protecon 12%West Sussex and Brighton, HammersmithAdult Social services (exc judicial review) 7%has departed from the Tri-BoroughOther 5%Legal Partnership with Westminster andHousing 5%Kensington & Chelsea while a number ofEducaon 5%district level arrangements have also comeTransport and highways 2%to an end or lost members. Data security and informaon management/FOI 2%Shared legal services have their criticsCommunity safety/an-social behaviour enforcement 0%amongst lawyersThere was great client dissatisfaction as the shared service was unresponsive to their problems and thereFigure 6: In the foreseeable future, do you expect your budget for external legal services to:was a lack of understanding within the shared service of anything other than the originating councils objectives and policies,Increase slightly (5%-10%) 16%said one respondent. There were also a number of comments made to the surveyIncrease signicantly (>10%) 2%that the parties to some shared services were too busy with their day-to-day work to develop the processes and structuresStay more or the less the same (+/-5%) 52%that would realise the efficiency benefits of shared service arrangements. Decrease signicantly (>-10%) 5%They can also be a turn-off for prospective recruits. Amongst the 420 respondents to the careers side of theDecrease slightly (-5% to -10%) 25%survey (see The Race for Talent, p12), 35% said that they would be less likely to apply for a job in a shared legal service, comparedthey had a negative experience and 5% whoFigure 7: In general, how easy or difficult is it with just 10% who would be more likelywere neutral. Indeed, in many cases whereto hire good lawyers in the present market?to, despite a majority agreeing that itshared legal services arrangements have would have benefits in terms of variety andbeen dissolved, it has been due to seniorVery easy 0%quality of work and career developmentmanagement or political reasons rather thanQuite easy 7%opportunities.because the lawyers failed to get them toQuite dicult 54%Nevertheless, the majority of heads ofwork. Very dicult 39%legal surveyed who are (or have been) partOur shared service has provided of a shared service are generally positiveresilience in specialist areas (e.g. education, about the experience (FIG 10). Seventy- employment, adult social care) and to a seven per cent said that that the benefitslarge degree protected us from savings of joining a shared service had outweighedtargets, as well as providing interesting the costs (36% significantly; 41%work across a number of authorities, one reasonably) compared with 18% who saidrespondent said. The main disadvantage'