Simpson Grierson leans into trust, AI and flexibility as it rethinks the future of work
New Zealand law firm Simpson Grierson is using AI, hybrid work and revamped governance to future‑proof its people strategy – while leaning heavily on a culture of trust and unusually long staff tenure.
Speaking with HRD, people and culture director Jo Stevenson said the firm, which turns 140 next year, has evolved from a traditional local government-focused practice into a broad top‑tier competitor, offering across a full service of practices areas. She pointed to the “really long tenure” of staff, including at least three employees who have been with the firm for over 40 years, and strong examples of internal progression into leadership roles
Stevenson, who has been at Simpson Grierson for nearly 11 years, said the firm’s culture and growth opportunities are core to its retention story.
She joined as an HR manager and was later promoted into the director role, mirroring similar journeys in other functions – including an IT leader who spent 26 years at the firm before stepping into the director position after his predecessor retired.
“That commitment to bringing people through… is quite visual, people can see it,” Stevenson said, adding that the firm balances internal progression with targeted lateral hires.
Over the past decade, the firm has significantly reshaped its governance – a change Stevenson sees as critical to staying agile in what she describes as a shift from a VUCA world to a “BANI” one: brittle, anxious, non‑linear and incomprehensible.
“What I’ve noticed over the last 11 years is [that] the governance, getting your governance right is so important,” she said, highlighting the need for the right mix of decision‑makers and clear delegation so people have autonomy.
Today, the firm’s executive team has a much more direct line into decision‑making than it did a decade ago, with stronger representation at board meetings, partner planning days and strategy conferences.
“That has been great,” Stevenson said. “Our exec team… we’ve just got new energy and new ideas, and our board is really excited about that.”
One of the most striking outcomes of this governance shift has been the firm’s approach to flexible and hybrid work.
In a formal review of its flexible working arrangements last year, Simpson Grierson found a clear divide between what many partners wanted and what staff were asking for.
“We listened to the feedback, we put it to the board and the board actually made a decision in favour of the people, which surprised everybody,” Stevenson said.
Under the current hybrid model, the guiding principle is that employees are in the office more days than they are out, with most roles able to work from home up to two days per week. Junior lawyers and graduates, however, are generally limited to one WFH day to protect learning opportunities through “osmosis” and access to live client work.
There are also ad‑hoc flexible options beyond this, with teams expected to discuss coverage and capacity openly.
Stevenson said this has had an unexpected benefit: it has forced teams to communicate more deliberately about who is in the office, who is working remotely and how best to balance focus time with in‑person needs.
“Every Monday our team does a quick whip around… checking in, who’s around, have we got enough people on the ground,” she said, adding that staff will often volunteer to come in on days they would normally work from home if the team is “a bit light”.
Rebuilding ‘vibe’ and connection
While hybrid work has boosted deep focus for many, Stevenson said it has also raised familiar challenges around collaboration and connection.
“There’s also the… lack of collaboration and the lack of vibe… around the office,” she said. “Many businesses have struggled with how to get that back.”
In response, Simpson Grierson has experimented with new connection initiatives, including a program called “chances coffee”. Staff who opt in are randomly paired – via an AI tool – for coffee catch‑ups, either virtually or in person, three times a year.
“It’s been so successful,” Stevenson said. “Every time we run it… over 100 people in the business sign up… and it’s connecting people that would otherwise never have a conversation.”
Beyond culture, she noted, the initiative also makes “good business sense” by building relationships that support cross‑referrals and collaboration across teams.
AI as an opportunity and a critical thinking test
On AI, Stevenson is optimistic but pragmatic. The firm is in “workforce planning mode”, carefully assessing how roles – especially admin‑heavy ones – will evolve as more tasks are automated.
She sees significant upside for junior lawyers whose early careers have traditionally been dominated by document review and other repetitive work.
“I remember being a junior lawyer… you lost the will to live after a couple of days doing that,” she said, recalling manually categorising documents as privileged or relevant and applying sticky dots to endless pages.
“With that all gone… junior lawyers can use that time to upskill on other things that are probably more meaningful,” she added – from sharpening advocacy skills to developing negotiation capability in face‑to‑face client settings.
However, Stevenson is clear that AI will dramatically raise the bar on critical thinking.
“I am a fan of teaching people good critical thinking skills early… I don’t think they really focus enough on it at law school,” she said. “With AI, [you need] to stress test whether it’s actually fit for purpose and giving you the right answers.”
She also sees strong opportunities for support staff to become “super users” of AI tools and even help build specialised agents for the business.
The company's approach to AI is anchored in strict legal and professional obligations. Stevenson emphasised that, particularly in litigation, AI is “just another tool” and doesn’t change the basic duty to verify authorities and ensure submissions are accurate.
“If you’re citing any cases, if you haven’t tested whether they are valid cases, then you’re not doing your job properly,” she said. “AI is no different… The issue… is that it’s so convincing… so confident in its answers that I can understand juniors being swayed by that.”
To mitigate that risk, the firm provides detailed guidance and ongoing training, backed by specialist teams educating litigators on safe AI use.
Training is reinforced by the New Zealand court rules, laws of evidence and professional standards set by the New Zealand Law Society, as well as internal and external litigation skills programs.
“There’s so much training around it… I get told, I get told too much training,” Stevenson said. “But no, that’s exactly why we do it.”
Trust as the through‑line
Across hybrid work, AI, governance and learning, Stevenson keeps coming back to a central theme: trust.
Where once legal practice could be characterised by presenteeism and “undesirable behaviours”, she said, Simpson Grierson is now placing far greater emphasis on trusting people and recognising “the lives they have to live”.
“We see a lot of that trust and loyalty coming back to us,” she said. “Once we see people for the human beings that they are… it’s a win‑win for us.”
For a 140‑year‑old firm facing AI disruption, economic shocks and shifting employee expectations, that combination of trust, governance and continuous learning may prove to be its biggest competitive edge.
