What Chambers Researchers Are Looking For: A Guide for Law Firm Marketing and BD Teams
- Jun 23
- 7 min read
Every Chambers USA submission cycle, law firm marketing and BD teams put enormous energy into the written submission. The highlights get drafted, reviewed, and revised. The firm overview gets polished. The practice area narrative gets refined.
And then a Chambers researcher makes a call to a referee who wasn't prepared, and weeks of work get undermined in a 20-minute conversation.
Understanding what Chambers researchers are looking for, and how they evaluate what they find, is the foundation of a submission strategy that holds up. This guide covers exactly that.
The Chambers Submission System covers the full picture: what researchers look for, how to build highlights that satisfy their criteria, and how to prepare referees for the interview. Early bird pricing is $397 with instant access to your inbox. See everything that's inside.
What Chambers Research Is About
Chambers USA rankings are based on two things: the written submission and the research interviews. Most firms treat the written submission as the primary event. The researchers treat both equally.
The research process works like this. After the submission window closes, Chambers assigns researchers to each practice area. Those researchers read the submissions, identify the referees listed, and conduct telephone interviews with as many of those referees as they can reach. They also speak with peers, meaning other attorneys in the market, to gather independent perspective on which firms and individuals are doing work worth ranking.
The written submission gets the firm into the conversation. The referee interviews determine where in the rankings the firm lands.
That sequencing matters, because a submission that reads well but is backed by unprepared referees will consistently underperform relative to its potential. A submission with strong highlights and well-prepared referees compounds both advantages.
What Researchers Look for in the Written Submission
Chambers researchers are reading submissions to answer one question: does this practice group or individual perform work that clients would pay a premium for, and can the referees listed confirm it?
Every section of the submission should be built around answering that question.
Matter Highlights
Matter highlights are the core of the written submission. Researchers use them to assess the caliber and complexity of the work, and to build the questions they will ask referees. A highlight that is too vague gives a researcher nothing to work with. A highlight that is specific gives them a hook for the research conversation.
Three elements make a highlight land:
The complexity of the matter. What made this work difficult? What was the legal or commercial challenge the client faced?
The outcome. What was achieved? Specificity matters more than scale. A precise outcome is more credible than a general one.
The reason the outcome was hard to achieve. This is the element most highlights omit. It is also the element that distinguishes a practice group doing premium work from one doing standard work.
Highlights that hit all three elements give researchers something concrete to reference in referee interviews. Highlights that miss one or more give researchers nothing to probe, and the referee conversation defaults to general impressions rather than specific evidence.
The Firm Overview and Practice Area Narrative
The firm overview and practice area narrative sections frame the submission. Researchers use them to understand what the practice group does, who it serves, and what distinguishes it from competitors in the same space.
Common mistakes in these sections include writing to impress rather than to inform, using superlatives without evidence, and describing the practice at such a high level that it could apply to any firm. Researchers read dozens of submissions in a single practice area. Vague language reads as forgettable, regardless of how well it is written.
What works: specific descriptions of the type of work the group handles, the market it serves, and the kinds of clients it represents. If the group has a distinctive strength or a market position that is genuinely different from competitors, name it plainly and let the highlights support it.
The Referee List
The referee list is the bridge between the written submission and the research interviews. Researchers use it to identify who to contact, and they assess the list itself as a signal of the firm's client relationships.
Chambers typically accepts up to 30 referees per submission. Quality matters more than quantity every time. A referee who can speak specifically to the matters highlighted in the submission is worth more than three referees who know the firm generally but cannot speak to specific work.
Researchers notice when referees seem like a generic client list rather than a curated group of people who can speak to the work in the submission. Alignment between the highlights and the referees is a credibility signal.
What Researchers Look for in Referee Interviews
The referee interview is structured around six categories. Researchers ask about each one in every interview, though the emphasis and specific questions vary depending on what the submission contained and what the researcher is trying to verify.
The six categories are:
Quality of legal advice. Is the work technically strong? Does the attorney demonstrate expertise and judgment, or do they execute without adding strategic value?
Responsiveness. Is the team accessible when clients need them? Do they communicate proactively or only when asked?
Commercial awareness. Does the attorney understand the client's business, not just the legal issue? Do they advise in the context of the client's commercial reality?
Value for money. Does the client feel the fees are proportionate to the quality and outcome of the work?
Depth of team. Does the practice have a deep bench or rely on a small number of practitioners? Can clients rely on the team at multiple levels?
Client relationship. Is this a transactional relationship or a genuine partnership? Does the firm understand the client's long-term needs?
A referee who has not been briefed on these categories will answer in generalities. They will say the firm is excellent, responsive, and easy to work with. Those answers are positive but they are not differentiated. Every referee for every firm says something similar.
A referee who has been briefed will answer with specifics. They will describe a particular matter, a particular moment where responsiveness mattered, a particular conversation where commercial awareness made a difference. Those answers give researchers something to work with, and they are the answers that move rankings.
Close These Gaps in Your Submissions
The firms that consistently rank well in Chambers are not necessarily doing better work than the firms that plateau. In many cases, they are doing the same caliber of work but presenting it more effectively and preparing their referees more thoroughly.
The gap is almost always one of three things:
Highlights that describe the work without showing why it was complex or difficult to achieve.
Referees who were selected for their relationship with the firm rather than their ability to speak to specific matters.
Referee preparation that happened too late, too briefly, or not at all.
Closing that gap requires presenting the work that already exists in a way that researchers can evaluate and referees can confirm.
The Chambers Submission System covers every stage of this process: what researchers look for, how to build highlights that satisfy their criteria, how to select and prepare referees for the six interview categories, and how to manage the full cycle from outreach to submission.
It is built on best practices from completing 350+ Chambers USA submissions across 15+ U.S. practice groups. Early bird pricing is $397 with instant access to your inbox. Price increases to $497 on July 1.
Need to make the case internally first? Here is the one-line pitch: it is a $397 guide built from the best practices curated over 350+ Chambers USA submissions that will save your team significant time this cycle. If you need a formal quote or invoice for approval, email hello@arewhycomms.com.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do Chambers researchers read every submission in full?
Researchers read every submission they are assigned, but they do not read all sections with equal attention. The matter highlights and referee list receive the most scrutiny because they directly inform the research interviews. The firm overview and practice area narrative are read for context. A submission that is strong in highlights and referees will outperform one that is strong in narrative but weak in those two areas.
How much weight do referee interviews carry compared to the written submission?
Chambers does not publish a formula, but practitioners with experience in the process consistently report that referee interviews carry at least as much weight as the written submission, and in many cases more. The written submission gets the firm considered. The referee interviews determine the outcome.
Can a firm improve its ranking without changing the quality of its work?
Yes, within limits. A firm doing strong work that is poorly presented and backed by unprepared referees will consistently rank below its potential. Improving the submission and the referee preparation process can close that gap without any change to the underlying work. The ceiling is still set by the quality of the work itself, but most firms have significant room between where they rank and where their work would place them with a better process.
What is the most common mistake firms make with their referee lists?
Selecting referees based on the strength of the relationship rather than their ability to speak to specific matters. A long-standing client who likes the firm generally but cannot speak to recent complex work is a weaker referee than a newer client who was closely involved in a matter highlighted in the submission. The referee list should be built around the highlights, not around the firm's most loyal relationships.
Where can I get a complete system for managing Chambers USA submissions?
The Chambers Submission System from Are Why Communications is a 22-page guide covering every stage of the process: attorney outreach, highlight writing, referee strategy, and deadline management. Built on best practices from completing 350+ Chambers USA submissions across 15+ U.S. practice groups. Early bird pricing is $397 with instant access to your inbox. Available at chambers-guide.arewhycomms.com. Price increases to $497 on July 1.
