The hidden dangers of constant ‘urgency’ for lawyers

Due to this now-structural mindset and expectation, the pressure to respond instantly to decisions, emails, and colleagues is treated as the norm rather than a clearly defined concept – one that poses serious risks for lawyers.

Dimple Kainth, CEO and principal lawyer of Satya Law, highlighted just how prominent this reality is, recalling how she “immediately” noticed the pervasive culture of urgency upon stepping into a law firm.

“I noticed it almost immediately because I was experiencing it myself and watching it play out around me. I was a first-generation lawyer, had never worked at a law firm before, and unfortunately, law school did nothing to prepare me for the reality of practising law,” she said.

Immediately recognising this reality, it quickly became her own, as Kainth reflected on being swept into a relentless cycle of “urgent” work with little guidance, learning that responding quickly and saying yes was rewarded while questioning priorities or timelines was quietly discouraged.

“As a junior lawyer, I had very little control over my schedule, and I was routinely given ‘urgent’ work without any further instruction, explanation of risk, consequence, or deadlines,” she said.

“The expectation from senior counsel and clients was immediate responsiveness.

VIEW ALL

“I felt the constant pressure to respond quickly, to stay late, and to say yes because from what I could see, that behaviour was clearly expected and rewarded, while questions about timing and prioritisation were quietly discouraged.”

However, Kainth noted that she wasn’t alone in feeling constantly busy and stressed, reflecting that those around her also felt the overwhelming workload, even though few could explain why every task carried such an urgent, critical weight.

“I knew I was not the only one experiencing this because when I spoke with opposing counsel or lawyer friends, they would also talk about how they were constantly busy and stressed,” she said.

“But, other than saying ‘we have too much work to do’, none of us could articulate why everything was critical.”

Throughout her career, Kainth explained that while true urgency is tied to concrete deadlines and statutory timelines, much of the so-called urgency lawyers feel daily is not fact-based but an internalised stress shaped by professional culture.

“As my career progressed and particularly in regulatory and disciplinary contexts, the contrast between urgency as a feeling rather than a clearly defined concept or reality became stark,” she said.

“In these environments, urgency is tied to concrete factors like statutory timelines, court dates, and limitation dates, where if you miss it, you face professional exposure.

“These experiences made it clear that most of what lawyers express as feelings of urgency is not fact-based, but is really an internalised stress or anxiety that is shaped by professional culture.”

The structural roots of urgency

So why does this pervasive sense of urgency persist in the legal profession?

Kainth argued that urgency has become structurally embedded in the profession, conditioning lawyers from the outset to equate speed, constant availability, and endurance with competence.

“Because urgency is structurally embedded in the profession, and boundaries are not valued or are discouraged,” she said.

“From the beginning, lawyers are conditioned to equate speed, availability, and endurance with competence and professionalism. Lawyers quickly learn that constant availability and saying yes is rewarded, while questioning urgency or setting boundaries is risky.”

Law firm hierarchies only deepen the problem, Kainth explained, funnelling pressure downward and leaving junior lawyers with little control or psychological safety as “urgent” work is handed down for execution rather than assessment, locking the profession into a cascading cycle of stress.

“Law firm hierarchies amplify this dynamic. Junior lawyers have little control over their schedules and do not have psychological safety to push back,” she said.

“Work is typically passed down already labelled ‘urgent’, and with little to no direction, and the expectation is execution, not assessment.

“Senior lawyers, themselves under pressure with their work, often transmit urgency downward to their junior lawyers, creating a cascade of stress instead of a system of decision making.”

She also explained how client anxiety fuels the culture of urgency, with emotionally charged matters labelled as ‘urgent’ and lawyers absorbing that pressure instead of pausing to evaluate it.

“Clients also reinforce this pattern. Legal issues are often emotionally charged and unfamiliar, so clients express their anxiety by labelling their matters as urgent,” she said.

“In environments where client satisfaction and billable output are prioritised, lawyers are implicitly encouraged to absorb that anxiety to keep the client happy.

“Because lawyers are not trained in how to set and maintain boundaries with clients, urgency becomes something that is imposed rather than evaluated.”

Firm culture further entrenches the cycle, Kainth explained, celebrating lawyers who are always “on” while quietly punishing those who set boundaries, and offering almost no reward for thoughtful pacing or disciplined prioritisation – even though these skills are critical to good legal judgement.

“Firm culture then locks this all in. Many firms value and celebrate lawyers who are always ‘on’ and quietly penalise those who try to introduce structure or limits, even when being constantly available leads to inefficiency and error,” she said.

“There is little institutional reward for thoughtful pacing or disciplined prioritisation, despite those skills being central to good legal judgement and in keeping with professional obligations.”

The personal toll of this cycle

By treating urgency as a feeling rather than defining it for oneself, Kainth explained, it swells, leaving lawyers responding to whichever matter is the loudest or most insistent instead of focusing on what truly demands immediate attention.

“When urgency isn’t defined, it expands. Everything competes for immediate attention, and prioritisation becomes impossible. Lawyers end up responding to whoever is loudest or most anxious, rather than to what actually requires prompt action,” she said.

In a regulatory context, she shared that treating everything as urgent can spiral into chaos, with lawyers sending rushed emails, missing key details, escalating conflicts unnecessarily, and even making mistakes that threaten their professional competence.

“In regulatory contexts, I see this play out in very concrete ways. Lawyers who treat everything as urgent often struggle with boundaries, practice management, and communication,” she said.

“They send rushed emails, take inconsistent positions, miss details, and escalate conflicts unnecessarily. In some cases, this leads to mistakes that raise competency concerns.”

She pointed out that, ironically, by treating everything as urgent, lawyers are more likely to make mistakes, undermining the “clarity, precision, and professionalism that legal practice requires”.

Often underestimated but equally critical, Kainth emphasised that the personal consequences of constant stress are severe, gradually eroding concentration, memory, and confidence, leaving lawyers feeling unproductive and out of control.

“The personal consequences are significant and often underestimated. Living and working in constant stress affects concentration, memory, and emotional regulation,” she said.

“Over time, stress begins to shape behaviour in that patience shortens, communication becomes more abrupt, and confidence erodes. Lawyers feel like they have no control, are always behind, and feel unproductive, even when they are working long hours.”

Kainth explained that stress inevitably spills over into home life, creating tension with partners, irritability with children, strained social connections, and a creeping sense that life outside work has become unmanageable.

“Stress spills over into home life, producing tension and conflict with partners or spouses, irritability with children, and difficulties maintaining social connections. Lawyers may feel guilty for missing family events or emotionally distant from loved ones,” she said.

“Over time, these pressures can contribute to marital strain, conflict with children or extended family, and a sense that life outside work is unmanageable.”

How can this change?

To tackle this challenge, Kainth advised that one of the first steps for lawyers is to clearly define what genuinely counts as urgent, recommending that filing deadlines, court dates, regulatory deadlines, and situations involving an objective, imminent risk of harm fall into this category.

She also recommended keeping this in check by creating a checklist of time-sensitive triggers, explaining how this measure can remove “ambiguity and support consistent decision making”.

Another key step she recommended is for lawyers to categorise matters by urgency and impact, explaining that this approach ensures they prioritise tasks that truly require immediate attention over those that can be addressed later.

“Implement a simple tiered system: high, medium, low urgency. High urgency requires immediate attention due to legal or regulatory risk; medium allows short-term scheduling; low can be batched or scheduled for later,” she said.

“Use examples to calibrate this internally. For instance, responding to a regulatory notice within 24 hours is high urgency, whereas drafting a client update may be medium or low urgency.”

Kainth stressed the importance of setting clear boundaries from the outset, ensuring clients, colleagues, and staff understand response times for non-urgent matters and when a matter will be prioritised immediately.

“Set expectations upfront. When taking on a matter, explain the response window for non-urgent issues and under what circumstances you will prioritise a matter immediately,” she said.

Technology can play a pivotal role in this, Kainth explained, with task management tools and shared calendars helping to flag deadlines, assign urgency levels, and provide clear notes for everyone involved.

“Use task management software to flag deadlines and assign urgency levels. Automatic reminders can help ensure that high-urgency matters are truly prioritised,” she said.

“Shared calendars with clear deadlines and notes for staff and senior counsel help everyone understand what must be addressed immediately.”