The shift from structure to flexibility

The introduction of the SQE has replaced the traditional training contract model with Qualifying Work Experience (QWE). While this change increases flexibility for aspiring solicitors, it also removes much of the built-in structure that firms historically relied on.

QWE allows experience to be gained across multiple roles, teams, or organisations.

The result is a shift from structured programme management to distributed experience tracking.

The core challenge: Recording and confirming experience

Under the SQE framework, the SRA does not directly assess workplace competence. Instead, it requires firms to confirm that QWE meets specific criteria.

Confirming solicitors must ensure that the experience:

• involved the provision of legal services
• included exposure to the Statement of Solicitor Competence skills
• lasted for the claimed duration
• raised no character or suitability concerns

This shifts responsibility firmly onto the firm. The challenge is not simply whether experience has occurred; it is whether it has been properly recorded, evidenced and can be confidently signed off.

Why QWE requires strong governance

QWE has four characteristics that make governance essential:

1. Fragmentation

Experience may be spread across multiple supervisors, departments, or even organisations. Without a central record, visibility is quickly lost.

2. Variability

There is no standardised pathway. Individuals may accumulate very different types of experience, making consistency difficult to maintain.

3. Evidence dependency

QWE must be supported by evidence. Retrospective reconstruction is unreliable and creates risk.

4. Sign-off security

QWE sign-off is an integral part of the SQE qualification process. Keeping a record to evidence internal sign-offs is valuable documentation.

Together, these factors mean that informal or manual approaches are unlikely to be sufficient.

Compliance and audit risk

Firms need to be able to show that QWE is being managed in a controlled and consistent way. In practice, that means having records that stand up to scrutiny and can be relied on if they are ever reviewed. Without a structured approach, it becomes much harder to maintain complete and consistent records or to confirm a trainee’s experience when needed. There is often a degree of reliance on individual supervisors’ recollection or informal notes, which can create gaps over time.

This becomes more significant if records are reviewed as part of an audit or internal check, particularly by the SRA. Where a confirming solicitor cannot clearly verify the experience based on documented evidence, sign-off becomes more difficult to support.

What good QWE governance looks like

For L&D and compliance teams, the focus should be on creating a system that is:

• Centralised – all QWE activity should be captured in a single, accessible environment.
• Structured – experience should be recorded against clear criteria, including competencies and duration.
• Timely – entries should be made in real time or close to the activity, not retrospectively.
• Evidenced – records should include sufficient detail to support sign-off, including supervision and feedback where appropriate.
• Visible – both individuals and confirming solicitors should be able to track progress and identify gaps.

This is not about creating complexity but about removing ambiguity.

The role of systems and platforms

Given the nature of QWE most firms will need a structured system rather than relying on spreadsheets or ad hoc processes. Recording experience as it happens, linking that work to the relevant SRA solicitor competencies and capturing supervisor input in a consistent way all contribute to a clearer and more reliable record over time.

A well-designed platform also supports confirming solicitors when it comes to sign-off, with a clear audit trail and accessible records to rely on. The aim is to to store information and ensure there is confidence in the accuracy and integrity of what has been recorded.

Practical implications for L&D teams

For learning and development teams QWE does not remove the need for structured programmes, particularly where trainees complete their experience within a single firm. Cohort-based delivery, seat rotations and supervisor support remain central. The shift is more about how that experience is defined, recorded, and evidenced alongside the programme.

In practice, this means placing greater emphasis on consistency and visibility. Trainees need clear guidance on what counts as valuable QWE, supervisors need to be supported in recording and confirming experience in a structured way and L&D teams need earlier insight into gaps in competency exposure.

Conclusion

The move from training contracts to QWE represents a significant operational shift for law firms. While the overall programme may look familiar, with defined cohorts and rotations, the move to the SQE places more responsibility on firms to ensure that experience is consistently documented, mapped to competencies is and supported by clear evidence at the point of confirmation

Firms that treat QWE as a light-touch administrative process are more likely to encounter challenges. Those that implement clear, structured governance will be better positioned to meet regulatory expectations and support their people effectively.

The priority remains straightforward: ensure that experience is recorded as it happens, linked to competencies, and supported by a clear audit trail so that sign-off can be completed with confidence.

If you are reviewing how your firm manages QWE recording and governance, it is worth assessing whether your current approach would stand up to audit and whether confirming solicitors have the information they need when it matters.