This paper explores influences on the legal activity of attorneys in five federally funded legal services agencies. I examine the effect on legal activity of three sets of variables: lawyer characteristics, organizational features, and interorganizational en vironment. The data suggest that legal activity is influenced most directly by the nature of the interorganizational environment. The influence of personnel and organizational characteristics is indirect and situational, conditioned by the interorganizational context. The findings call into question many of the criticisms expressed by opponents of the Legal Services Corporation. They also suggest that constraints imposed by local organizations on legal services activities are at least as important as national attempts to modify the corporation's mission.

Lawyer-discipline systems underwent substantial reorganization in a majority of states during the 1970s, with responsibility for their operation moving from the bar associations in which they had been located for almost a century to agencies of the state supreme courts. While this transfer of the locus of lawyer discipline resulted in a diminution of the power of the organized bar, it encouraged the professionalization of the process. In this paper the reasons for the willingness of the bar associations in Illinois to cede control over such a central component of professional regulation are examined and their implications for the sociology of the legal profession discussed. Unable to maintain the status quo in the face of extensive criticism, the Illinois bar associations chose not to meet the high costs of upgrading the discipline process but rather to divest themselves of a function that, although at one time central to their identity and authority, had become inconvenient and damaging to their image. It is suggested that the bar associations were willing to countenance such a divestiture because their positions as collective representatives of the profession in Illinois were secure and the major parameters of lawyer discipline well established. Whereas immediate control over self-regulation processes may be necessary during the developmental phase of professionalism, it is not so important once the profession has achieved a dominant market position.