Supervising Remote Workers in Law Firms - Best Practice

Remote and hybrid working are no longer reactive measures introduced during a period of disruption. They are now defining features of how modern law firms operate. For many firms, the question has shifted from whether remote working should exist, to how it can be embedded safely, sustainably and in a way that compliments professional standards.

Done well, supervision in a remote or hybrid environment can enhance quality, support talent development and improve resilience. Done poorly, it exposes firms to regulatory, operational and reputational risk. This is not simply an operational issue. It is a strategic one.

Many firms are settling into hybrid models that combine flexibility with in-person interaction. Offices still matter, particularly for complex supervision, mentoring and culture-building.

However, hybrid working only works when it is intentional. Without clarity, it risks inconsistency, disengagement and supervision gaps.

Leading firms are clear about:

when in-person collaboration adds value
how supervision operates across locations
how remote and office-based staff are treated equitably.

Hybrid working, at its best, reflects thoughtful leadership rather than compromise.

Supervision Has Always Mattered

Effective supervision has always been a cornerstone of legal practice. What has changed is the environment in which it takes place.

Historically, supervision often relied on physical proximity. Supervisors could sense when something was going wrong, overhear difficult calls, or offer reassurance in real time. Much of this oversight was informal and, crucially, undocumented. Remote working removes those many of these cues.

The Solicitors Regulation Authority has consistently made clear that firms are responsible for ensuring effective supervision regardless of where work is carried out. The location of staff does not change the firm’s obligations; it merely changes how those obligations must be met.

Remote working therefore forces firms to articulate, structure and evidence supervision in ways that were previously implicit.

From Informal Oversight to Intentional Design

One of the clearest lessons from remote working is that supervision cannot be left to chance.

Firms that have adapted well are those that have moved from:

reactive oversight
informal check-ins
assumptions about staff availability

to:

deliberate supervision frameworks
clear accountability
predictable communication.

This does not mean micromanagement. In fact, effective remote supervision is often less intrusive and more focused than traditional models. It prioritises clarity over control and judgement over presence.

The Law Society has highlighted that good remote supervision depends on planning, structure and accessibility rather than constant monitoring. That insight reflects a broader shift in professional services: supervision is increasingly about quality of thinking, not visibility of activity.

Communication as a Strategic Control

An often-overlooked risk in remote and hybrid environments is the way people communicate. When teams are dispersed, individuals naturally gravitate towards different tools such as email, instant messaging platforms, phone calls, video meetings, or informal messaging apps. While flexibility can support efficiency, inconsistency creates risk if firms lose visibility of how and where client communications are taking place.

Firms should be clear about which communication channels are approved for client work, how key decisions and advice are recorded, and how supervision can be exercised across those channels. Informal or fragmented communication makes it harder to supervise effectively, increases the risk of misunderstandings, and can undermine audit trails that are critical from both a regulatory and insurance perspective.

This risk is heightened where personal devices are used for work purposes. The use of personal messaging applications for client communications raises clear concerns around confidentiality, data protection and information security. Even well-intentioned practices can expose firms to significant risk if communications are not captured, stored securely, or accessible for supervision and review.

Effective remote supervision therefore extends beyond legal work itself. It requires firms to set clear expectations around communication methods, reinforce the importance of using firm-approved systems, and ensure supervisors understand how work is being conducted day-to-day. Clear boundaries in this area support better supervision, protect clients, and reduce the risk of regulatory or data breaches.

Visibility Without Surveillance

Remote supervision becomes significantly more effective when supervisors have visibility of work and workload. This does not require complex systems, but it does require discipline.

Shared task lists, matter dashboards and reporting alongside consistent case management practices allow supervisors to:

see where pressure points are developing
allocate work more fairly across teams
intervene early when risks arise.

This visibility is not about surveillance. It is about shared understanding. It also supports wellbeing. Overwork and disengagement are far easier to address when they are visible rather than hidden behind email updates.

Supporting the Next Generation

Remote and hybrid working models have created challenges for junior lawyers, trainees and new joiners. Learning through observation is harder when there is no shared physical environment, and uncertainty can be easier to conceal.

The Law Society has noted that junior staff often require closer and more frequent supervision when working remotely.

Forward-thinking firms have responded by:

increasing the level of supervision for less experienced staff
formalising escalation routes
pairing supervisors with mentors
creating structured opportunities for shadowing and joint work.

Perhaps most importantly, effective supervisors actively normalise questions. In remote environments, junior staff may hesitate to interrupt or escalate concerns. Firms that explicitly frame early escalation as a strength create safer, more resilient cultures.

Outcomes Over Optics

One of the most powerful opportunities presented by remote working is the shift away from presence-based management. Supervision that focuses on outcomes, quality, timeliness, judgement and client impact is often fairer and more effective than supervision based on visibility.

This requires clarity:

What does good work look like?
What decisions require escalation?
How is performance assessed?
How are mistakes handled?

Firms that answer these questions explicitly tend to supervise more effectively, regardless of location.

Conclusion

Remote working has not reduced the importance of supervision; it has exposed its true nature.

Firms that view supervision as a compliance obligation may struggle. Firms that treat it as a strategic capability are better placed to manage risk, develop talent and build trust with regulators and clients.

Ultimately, effective supervision in a remote or hybrid environment is not about control. It is about clarity, confidence and accountability. Firms that embed those principles will not only meet regulatory expectations but will differentiate themselves in a rapidly evolving legal landscape.

How Legal Eye can help

Our remote outsourced file review service acts as the perfect partner for your COLP, providing clear, independent oversight and supervision while freeing up your internal team to focus on clients and case progression.

With increased regulatory focus on enforcement, ongoing AML obligations, and greater scrutiny from insurers – particularly around hybrid and remote working – firms must be able to demonstrate that file reviews are consistent, objective, and acted upon.

Book a trial day and see the difference:

Up to 20 files reviewed by our experienced team (depending on file size and content)
Comprehensive, documented reviews across a range of work types
A clear summary highlighting training needs, repeat errors, and caseload concerns.