Archive for February, 2009

Practicing Entertainment Law

Not too long ago, practicing entertainment law was a dream job for many up-and-coming law students, as well as attorneys looking to lateral into their truly desired specialties. Dreams of a glamorous lifestyle were all too common: visions of the chance to hobnob with celebrities, to work on the most interesting cases in the profession, and many perks, such as concert tickets, attending movie premieres, and sporting events, danced in their heads. Along with the high salaries and potential to cross over into a highly desirable entertainment company as in-house counsel, the glamour and fame that many assumed came hand in hand with this job made this dream irresistible.

In reality, working as an entertainment lawyer is not as glamorous, and maybe this perception has finally reached the general lawyer population, since the number of applications to these firms has dropped in recent months. In truth, few entertainment law firms have the kinds of perks, desirable clients, and lifestyles people often associate with them. But entertainment law still remains a highly desirable profession, with many unsure what the practice actually entails aside from the myth.

What is entertainment law?

Depending upon whom you ask, you will find a variety of answers to the question. While there is no agreed-upon definition per se, entertainment law is actually just a distinction based upon the type of clients rather than the type of work these lawyers practice. Entertainment lawyers typically counsel clients in business or intellectual property law, including accompanying contracts, copyright, litigation and licensing issues, and sometimes other concerns that pertain to employment, securities, international, taxation, and immigration practice areas. In actuality, an entertainment lawyer spends his time performing research, writing briefs, and filing motions just like any other contract, business litigation, or I.P. lawyer.

The reason behind the entertainment specialty is that the clients these lawyers provide services for happen to be in the entertainment business in some capacity. While firms who represent talent will deal with celebrities, those who represent management deal with companies. Often this means clients who are heads of Warner Bros., MTV, CBS, and many other high-profile corporations. And while you may get the chance to have a celebrity client, your everyday existence consists of tasks that most litigation lawyers deal with, such as writing briefs, taking depositions, researching topics, and filing motions. While perks such as tickets and premieres occasionally come with the territory, they are not an industry norm. The truth is, you still spend the majority of your time at the office doing research and writing, just like other lawyers. Attending high-profile events and getting whisked away by clients in limos to movie premieres, dinner events, and sporting arenas are infrequent perks that cannot be expected. If this is the life you think entertainment lawyers have, then this practice area will leave you very disappointed.

In addition, dealing with celebrities does not always live up to the reputation. You go to work and see a noted celebrity in the elevator, only to discover he is attending a deposition with a senior partner at your firm; and while there may be a rapport, oftentimes dealing with creative, high-profile entertainment industry types can be more frustrating. While you may get the occasional glimpse at a celebrity, the star-struck tendency quickly dissipates, and the deposition or meeting becomes like many others: addressing the facts of your client’s case and their concerns. Furthermore, a lot of celebrities are difficult to deal with, showing up notoriously late to court appearances or missing them altogether, pulling fits about wearing suits, or simply being temperamental. Suddenly, you may find yourself yearning for the normal, non-entertainment client.

This is not to say that practicing entertainment law lacks excitement. On the contrary, the intellectual property issues that emerge, as well as defamation, contract, and copyright issues, are all interwoven into an interesting and appealing context. What may appear tedious and dry in an I.P. firm suddenly comes alive against the backdrop of the latest television show or may involve an interesting set of circumstances the average client just does not face. Quirky and humorous and often very appealing, the cases are interesting in nature. But again, the tasks are the same: research and writing, motions, and court dates that are required for other cases.

In addition, working with and for members of the creative industry creates an interesting merger of law and business and a context removed from typical intellectual property scenarios, which can be tedious and dry. Rather, working on high-profile or newsworthy cases that appeal to the public’s sense of popular culture can be exciting. Because of this, your cases make for the best dinner conversation. They are the types of stories both colleagues and the general public will be interested in hearing. This makes the practice exciting. Despite the long hours and intense work schedule, the cases are interesting to work on and talk about, and this makes for a desirable aspect to the specialty.

Breaking in

Breaking into the entertainment field is difficult, whether you are a law student or whether you are a mid-level associate seeking a lateral position. The bottom line is you must have worked in the capacity that entertainment law requires: intellectual property cases, preferably complex, as well as business litigation for well-known clients related to the entertainment sector. In addition, networking and luck also play a large role in landing this type of position.

As a student, the ability to earn a position in the entertainment law field depends upon the combination of going to a top school or working at an IP or business litigation firm to have the crossover topics, as well as luck. As an associate, the competition continues to be fierce, and, again, working in a similar industry is key. Networking–having appropriate contacts–will be the important component to help secure a position in this ever-desirable specialty. This will be important again if you decide to consider the partner track, go solo, or seek an in-house position at an entertainment company.

You have to be able to show the firm that you can handle the caseload and the type of work, as well as to understand the true nature of entertainment law. This means that if you want to practice entertainment litigation, you must show your strength as a litigator for complex business cases with high-profile clients, just the type of work you will end up practicing at the entertainment law firm. In addition, you must show an eagerness to work on these types of cases and that you realize you will be a hard-working attorney who happens to work in the entertainment sector.

What it takes to succeed

As has often been noted, the world is a small place, and the legal world is no exception. The chances of your running into someone you know or once knew or someone removed by three degrees of separation is highly likely in this context. Networking is crucial to making your mark as an up-and-coming attorney. In the entertainment industry, this is even truer. The world of entertainment law is a small one, with the primary cities being New York, Los Angeles, and Nashville. Certainly you are bound to run into someone you know either as opposing counsel or in some other context. This means that keeping cordial relations with all parties and all attorneys on a particular case is particularly important if you seek longevity. Also, keeping contacts allows an attorney to stay abreast of the changes in the profession, which occur frequently, and all of this allows an attorney to consider options that are not readily available or advertised. This usually translates into in-house opportunities, which are considered to be the most desirable positions in the entertainment field.

Networking is also imperative in the entertainment industry to create business for your firm. You need the contacts and the name to learn about a potential client’s business and to meet a potential client directly or indirectly as well. This is crucial because in this industry, reputation and visibility are often the most relied-upon factors clients use in determining whether to work with you. If you are seeking to become partner of an entertainment firm, you will have to network to gain a reputation and bring in business to show a firm your strengths and your irreplaceability.

Conclusion

While entertainment law does not coincide with the myth, it is still a highly desirable and extremely competitive specialty. Entertainment lawyers work on complex cases, spending the majority of their time in the same manners that other lawyers do, and yet they are seen as the more glamorous members of the profession. Regardless of the myth, these lawyers work on interesting cases that affect basic rights of members of the creative industry.

Whatever the choice, one must consider what the practice actually entails, going beyond the popular myth. It may just be that you are actually happy with the position that you have. Otherwise, a position in the entertainment field can achieve the sense of excitement and visibility that will leave you with a level of job satisfaction you have not yet experienced. If that’s the case, entertainment law may just be your calling.

The Importance of Networking and Your Legal Career

One thing that many attorneys do not know is that the most successful attorneys are “networked.” Attorneys who do not network often fail over time because of this fact alone.

By “networked,” I mean these attorneys have developed a very large circle of people with whom they can (1) access information they would not otherwise have and (2) make themselves known to a pool of people to whom they otherwise would not be known. Having access to information about jobs, developments within your firm, happenings in the legal market, clients with business they can give you and your firm, and more is essential to your success as an attorney. Moreover, being known to sources of information relevant to your career is even more important. What others outside your immediate circle of influence know is arguably just as important as what people inside your immediate circle of influence know.

This article examines the importance of networking to your legal career. First, this article discusses the value of networking in finding a job inside a law firm; second, it discusses the importance of networking to keeping a job inside a law firm; and, third, it discusses why the failure to network can be fatal to your career.
As this article will demonstrate, few things are as important to your legal career as the ability to effectively network.

A. The Importance of Networking in Finding a Job Inside a Law Firm

  1. Most people learn about jobs from people other than their close friends. Studies have shown that most people find out about their jobs through other people. In the late 1960s, a graduate student at Harvard, Mark Granovetter did a study of how people find out of about their jobs. Granovetter subsequently published a book on this and other findings in the mid-1990s that offers many important findings about how people learn about their jobs. (Granovetter, Mark. Getting a Job: A Study of Contacts and Careers. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995.) Granovetter interviewed numerous people and asked them to identify the five people they spent the most time with and draw a diagram as to how those people were connected with each other. At the time, it was a well-known fact that most people learn about jobs through other people rather than through advertising. Accordingly, Granovetter also asked the individuals he interviewed to identify the person who referred them to their last job.The interesting part about this study was that the person who was identified was never one of the five close friends. When Granovetter asked them to tell him about the person who did refer them to the job, the people almost always responded that the person was an “acquaintance” and not a friend. Granovetter interviewed 282 technical, managerial, and professional workers for his study and found that of the 56% of the people who found their jobs through personal contacts, only 17% learned about their last positions from close friends.The lesson behind Granovetter’s findings seems to be that most people learn about jobs through people who are outside of their immediate networks. People whom you are closest to are likely to have access to the same information you do. Conversely, people outside of your close group are likely to be exposed to information you are not exposed to. Therefore, if you want to learn about a job, it is important that you have access to people outside of your existing network of close friends. There is no reason to suspect this logic would not apply to attorneys, either. In fact, in my experience, the logic is even more apropos: I would estimate that less than 5% of all attorneys get positions through people inside their immediate circle of influence.

    One of the most interesting things I ever heard when I was practicing law was when an individual who is considered one of the more successful attorneys in America said to me and a group of other first-year associates: “One of the biggest mistakes of my life was not making more friends and getting closer with people in law school.” At the time, this statement amazed me because I saw this individual as someone quite remarkable in his own right. I did not understand what the person was talking about because in my eyes, I had a hard time believing the person could be even more successful. What I did not understand at the time was that this attorney believed that if he had properly networked, even at that early stage, he could have been far, far more successful than he was.

    Regardless of how well you networked in law school, when you commence the practice of law and throughout your career, networking is something that is profoundly important to your present or future job search. Networking beyond your immediate social ties is something that is necessary for you to be successful when and if you are ever seeking a position.

    In large law firms, the emphasis on billable hours, the meticulousness of the work, and the stress and demands of the practice of law will often undermine the importance of networking. Many attorneys may feel that once they have joined a large law firm, their number-one task is to do the absolute best work they are capable of, and, if they do that and nothing more, they will be successful. This could not be further from the truth. While most young attorneys are ignorant of this fact, the odds are overwhelmingly strong that they will not be at the firms they joined out of law school for more than 2 or 3 years. If the next firm they join is a large firm as well, the odds are also very good that they will not be there more than 2-3 years, either.

    If a young attorney goes to a large law firm and closes the door or puts on blinders and works as hard as he or she can, he or she is making a mistake if he or she is not networking as well. There is a fallacy in thinking that if you just work as hard as you can and exclude external stimuli you will have long-term success. When an associate looks around him or her and sees groups of partners and imagines the success these individuals are experiencing, he or she often does not grasp what it was that made these partners successful. In most cases, it was networking.

    It goes without saying that you need to be good at your job. However, the work you are doing inside a law firm has to come from somewhere. Work almost always comes from partners who have managed to make contacts somewhere outside the law firm. These partners have gotten involved in the community and met people outside of their immediate group of attorneys and these people have (1) given them business, or (2) spread the word about the attorney and their good work. This networking is why most attorneys have jobs to begin with.

    Your ability to get a legal job through networking is a subtle thing. You need to have a large circle of people with whom you associate both inside and outside of the law. I also believe that you are far more likely to get a position from someone outside the immediate group of lawyers you know inside your law firm than lawyers you may know well at your own firm or as close friends. If you know a few people and stay close to them, you are likely to only benefit from the information they have, and you will almost always know what this information is. If you know numerous people as “acquaintances” outside this immediate sphere, you will be exposed to a great deal more information. The number may be 10 or 20 times as much information.

  2. The most successful attorneys are frequently the most networked. As a recruiter, part of my job is to make telephone calls and speak with attorneys about job openings. When I recruit, I have often noticed that the best attorneys are the ones who are often the most open to speaking with me. In fact, when I first started recruiting successful partners several years ago, I was surprised how friendly they were. They were many times friendlier than young associates. Back then I wondered why this was. As I will explain below, I now know why this was the case.One source of leads that a good legal recruiter will use for their legal recruiting efforts are lists which are published by various publications, such as “The Top 40 Lawyers Under 40 in California” or “America’s Top Trial Lawyers,” for example. When I telephone lawyers from these lists, while they are almost always very happy with their current positions and unlikely to move, they are universally very open to speaking with me and very interested in any information I can offer about the job market and what is going on with it. These attorneys will ask me to send them my card, take the time to speak with me, and almost always remember me if I see them at one event or another in the future. There are several reasons I believe this is true.First and foremost, I believe that these attorneys who get on these various lists do so because they are good at networking in the first place. However they do it, they are able to get the attention of individuals in the media and other attorneys in their firm and at other firms, since members of the public nominate them for such lists. The ability of these attorneys to get themselves media acknowledgement is meaningful because many attorneys who are much better attorneys are not even singled out like this because no one knows about them. Whenever I read such lists, knowing what I do about the legal market, I am almost always intrigued because I know full well that there are many attorneys that are not on these lists that are much better attorneys than the attorneys that are mentioned on these lists. The reason they are not on the lists and the other attorneys are on these lists is because the one group of attorneys is “networked” and the other is not.In my conversations with the attorneys on these lists, the reason they take my phone calls and speak with me as long as they do is that they as individuals highly value setting up networks. My telephone call, while it would be annoying to less savvy attorneys, is welcomed by networkers who will put down their work to network and learn some information from me. More importantly, when you look back on the Granovetter study, a very good explanation for the reason these attorneys take my calls so seriously is due to the fact that they value networks beyond their immediate spheres of influence. When you look at how most individuals learn about jobs, they are learning about them through networks outside their immediate spheres of influence.
  3. How to network yourself into an attorney job. There are several ways you can network to find an attorney job. I have listed most of these below.At the outset, though, I would like to mention that I have known numerous attorneys who have networked extensively and not found a job. When I hear this, I often sit down with these attorneys, and it becomes immediately evident to me why they have not located positions through networking. The answer is a very basic psychological one: these attorneys did not want a job. For me, such attorneys are easy to spot because they lack the sort of enthusiasm, engagement, and interest of someone who is going after something they want. Simply going to events and meeting all sorts of people will not help you if you really do not want a job. If you really want a job, your enthusiasm will come through when you are networking with people, and your enthusiasm will be contagious.First, you need to understand that with networking everything counts. How you act in the legal community and among friends, what you say and what you do-it all counts. There are plenty of people who have done things wrong as law students or as attorneys and believe this does not matter. Everything counts. When you develop a good reputation for yourself, help others, work hard, are honest, and even volunteer to attend events that seem meaningless, it counts.The reason I am so adamant about everything counting is due to the fact that most of what you do and have done is known by someone. When you become a topic of conversation or if someone is interested in passing along your name to someone looking for an attorney, there will typically be a general opinion expressed about you. You want that opinion to be positive, and you want people to think you are the sort of person to be recommended. Accordingly, my first recommendation is that everything you do counts in the final calculus of how networking can help you.

    Second, it is extremely important to make yourself known to lots of people. The reason that companies (and often people) hire advertising agencies, public relations firms, and so forth is that they want to make themselves known to large audiences of people and, more importantly, get the attention of these people. Attorneys use recruiters because recruiters have the ability to make you known to large groups of people and get their attention. A product cannot sell unless it is known to large groups of people. This should be self evident, but you need to take a moment to think about it. If people do not know who you are, how can you get a job?

    It is a well-known fact in the legal community that certain types of attorneys are easier to place than others. One reason for the use of recruiters is that many groups of attorneys and types of attorneys are not well networked. In large cities, networks are extremely difficult to form and maintain because there are so many people. In smaller cities, recruiters are rarely used because everyone knows each other. Even in large cities, there are some networks that are very highly developed among attorneys from certain practice groups, as opposed to other practice groups.

    One example of a tightly knit group of attorneys is bankruptcy attorneys in Silicon Valley. During the heyday of the dot-com boom, many of these attorneys had very little to do. They met in practice group meetings every few months (and most went because they were not that busy) and had a good idea of what everyone else was working on. When the legal market in Silicon Valley went south in late 2000, many of these dot coms all of a sudden went bankrupt. The law firms in Silicon Valley, where the need for a bankruptcy attorney had once been nonexistent, suddenly boomed and needed lots of bankruptcy attorneys. Recruiters were very excited by this news, and, combined with the economic downturn, they saw a real opportunity to capitalize on a poor marketplace.

    I was one of the recruiters who fell under this spell. Each time I would call a practicing bankruptcy attorney, the attorney would say something to the effect of (even if they had as little as one year of experience): “Oh, yeah, I already spoke with Partner X, the practice group leader at X firm the other day. He sure is busy. I told him I am happy but would give him a buzz in any event if I wanted to leave. He got some of that work from Y company’s bankruptcy, you know. I know he is interviewing Marge from Z firm next week.”

    I was very surprised by the first couple of calls I made because they all went like this. After 20 or 30 phone calls, I realized that, with limited exceptions, all the bankruptcy attorneys in Silicon Valley already knew each other. Moreover, they also knew most of the bankruptcy attorneys in San Francisco and even knew a lot of the bankruptcy attorneys in Los Angeles-an area that is hundreds of miles way. In all my years of legal recruiting, I had came across a network this widespread only this once.

    What this said to me is that the bankruptcy attorneys in the Silicon Valley had a very highly developed network. Whether this was due to the lack of bankruptcy work during the dot-com boom, which gave them time to socialize, the fact that there were so few bankruptcy attorneys in the area, or otherwise, it was an interesting phenomenon. Due to the highly developed network in Silicon Valley, these bankruptcy attorneys had no use for recruiters. If they needed a job with another Silicon Valley firm, the chances are they already knew about it or knew someone that did.

    Most of the legal world in larger cities is not like the bankruptcy practice group was in Silicon Valley during this time. In fact, in most major cities, there are hundreds of large law firms, and very few attorneys know each other. In addition, there are so many social networks in these legal communities that there is very little crossover and a real information vacuum. It is very difficult for attorneys to make their marks and develop networks of any substance in such legal markets. Few do. However, there are a few select attorneys who really realize the importance of all this networking. For them, there are more than enough organizations and other outside activities for them to get involved in.

    In most large cities there is a virtual panoply of events and organizations that attorneys can get involved in. Beyond getting involved in the bar association, there are tons of groups that deal with issues regarding certain practice areas and numerous other issues, such as lawyers who are interested in human rights, lawyers who are interested in animals, or lawyers who are interested in the arts. In fact, the list is almost endless. There are so many such groups that they are very difficult to count.

    I used to wonder when I saw the massive amounts of groups for attorneys in various large cities why attorneys possibly could have so much interest in all these groups. My thought was that if an attorney was interested in developments in contract law, for example, he would be better picking up a treatise when and if he needed information about these developments, or doing a quick LEXIS search to uncover this information, rather than going to some event. This, after all, would get you the same information you could get at the “conference.” Furthermore, if you go to such a meeting or conference, you will have to take time off from work and billing, drive there, pay for parking, and sit around with a bunch of boring attorneys who are scoping each other out trying to find out who is who.

    That is exactly the point of these conferences and meetings! When you go to meetings like this, you are taking the time to meet people. In addition, you are watching and listening to other attorneys outside your work and social circles and learning what they do. When you meet people you are learning of people they too might know and what they have in common. You are developing opportunities to add to the discussions that occur. You are developing the opportunity to speak personally about an issue. You are spreading your name around to others you otherwise might not meet, and you are developing a reputation based on your behavior. This is extremely important. The more you go to these meetings, the more familiar the people will become to you there and the more familiar you will become to them.

    If you participate in networking events in more than a passing manner, you will soon be known by numerous attorneys and others throughout your city and outside your immediate circle. When this many people know you, they will also to some extent know about how things are going for you at work, and whether or not you might be interested in a new job. They will mention you to the myriad of people they know when one of these people might be looking for someone to fill a position. They may mention your name to companies and others that need someone with your skills to do legal work.

    You will also have the opportunity to do people favors when you participate in groups and networking activities. When you have the opportunity to do people favors, they will want the opportunity to return the gestures. This too will increase the potential opportunities you have over time.

    When you keep in touch with your law school and go to events, this increases your networking possibilities. When you keep in touch with people you have known in the past, this increases your networking possibilities. When you take an interest in certain causes, sit on a board unrelated to law, or write books and papers (related to the law or not), this too increases your networking possibilities. In fact, everything you do that involves interacting with other people increases your networking possibilities.

  4. How outstanding legal recruiters and other services can network for you. One of the largest functions of my job is making networking happen for attorneys seeking jobs. There are several ways you can network when you are seeking a job. In the absence of very highly developed networks (which very few attorneys have), there are a few ways that I believe work quite well.The very best way to get a position without a massive network you have built over years in my opinion is through an exceptional legal recruiter. The ability of recruiters to effectively network for law firms and candidates is what they are paid for and why some are more successful than others.When times are very, very good, legal recruiters are often thought of in poor regard by attorneys seeking jobs because the perception is that all they are doing is making a simple introduction and collecting a large fee from the employer. This perception, however, ignores the reality of the situation. Most recruiters and legal recruiting firms are not that successful, and the reason is that they are not effective networking devices for either their clients or the attorneys they serve. Many legal recruiting firms are ignored in the market-no matter the quality of their candidates-because they do not do an effective job networking with their clients.About three years ago I heard a story that sounded extremely strange to me at the time but over time has become quite meaningful. There was a certain individual in Beverly Hills that I met through my wife. This person owned a pawn shop and had only come over to the United States a few years ago from a foreign country. This was no ordinary pawn shop, however.

    The main business of this pawn shop was loaning out money to movie stars and other outrageously wealthy people when they had financial problems. The people would bring by their rare art, Ferraris, jewelry-whatever-and the man would loan them pennies on the dollar in exchange for title and possession of these goods. In exchange for the loan, the people were charged interest, and part of the agreement was that if the people did not return the money they were loaned within a set length of time the pawnbroker would take possession of the goods. Suffice it to say, this pawnbroker was amazingly successful and had made millions of dollars doing this. He lived on the beach in Malibu, collected expensive rare sports cars, and had a very exciting playboy sort of lifestyle.

    I asked a couple of people about how this man became so successful because I was curious as to how owning a pawn shop could bring such fantastic rewards. The business model certainly had something to do with it. Nevertheless, I knew there had to be something more.

    When this man set up his first small pawn shop trading in trinkets, he immediately started asking around who the best public relations person was in Los Angeles. He apparently asked around for months and then was repeatedly told a name of someone that was so good at public relations, her reputation eclipsed those of all the rest. The man phoned the public relations person’s firm and was rudely told by a receptionist that the person did not take on any new clients unless the public relations person “approached them first.” Notwithstanding, the man kept calling over weeks and months and was eventually put through to the public relations person.

    The public relations person listened to the man gesticulate about how much he wanted her to work for him and how had heard so many good things about the public relations person. After a couple of minutes of this, the public relations person asked the man what he did. When he told her that he ran a pawn shop she quickly got him off the phone and told him she had no interest in doing public relations for a pawn shop. She also told the man that he could not afford her anyway because she changes a minimum retainer of $200,000 for her work.

    The next morning the man went to the public relations firm and told the receptionist that he wanted to see the public relations woman in person. The receptionist made a telephone call from her headset and told the man that the public relations woman would not see him. The man told the receptionist he would wait.

    And wait he did. Over the next two weeks, the man closed down his pawn shop and came by the public relations firm every day and sat in the lobby until the firm closed each night. Each day he was rebuffed and stated he would wait. After two weeks of this, the receptionist finally looked up at the man and stated “she will see you now.” The man met with the public relations woman, literally got on his knees and begged (the man was a commando in the country he came from) and she agreed to represent him.

    Within two weeks, the public relations woman had gotten stories running on the cover of the Los Angeles Times and stories placed in a couple of major magazines that were all variously titled “Pawnbroker to the Stars.” These articles made the man’s business take off in a hurry. In fact, they took his business to the moon. From what I understand, it quickly became one of the most successful pawn shops in the country.

    What the pawnbroker understood, and what many candidates of legal recruiting firms do not understand, is there are certain people that by virtue of their position in society, are uniquely placed in networks and can influence public opinion. I could write about the legal recruiting profession forever because I love it so much, but when it comes right down to it, a good legal recruiter can influence the course of your career because a good legal recruiter is well networked.

    Good legal recruiters are well networked because they are constantly speaking with law firms about what the law firm needs all day, every day. They are well networked because, by their very relationship with law firms, a dynamic is set up where certain law firms are likely to listen to them when the recruiter is serious. They are also an important “voice” inside the legal profession and someone who has direct contact with hiring partners and other hiring personnel inside law firms. This is essentially no different than what a good public relations firm can do for a company or individual. There are people who by their very nature and position in society can make your case heard.

    I have worked with countless candidates who, before I represented them, did not get a single interview. Once I was involved, they had job offers within a day or two (often at the same firms that had rebuffed or ignored these attorneys when they approached them on their own). I know what a good legal recruiter can do, and what a good recruiter can do is just as profound as what the public relations person was able to do for the pawn shop owner.

    Given the highly specialized work that good legal recruiters do, it should be no surprise that they cannot represent everyone in their job search. They have to have a certain set of standards for the candidates they represent, or else they are likely to lose credibility with the law firms they serve, which will harm their future efforts. The best recruiting firms typically have the highest standards. A good legal recruiter also spends a lot of time and effort on each candidate’s behalf and therefore can only work with a few people at one time.

    Good legal recruiters must also believe in the candidate who is seeking to get a job. If they believe in the candidate and the candidate’s motive for getting a job, they will likely be more successful. Just as a candidate who does not really want a job will be unsuccessful in his/her own networking efforts often, so too will a legal recruiter be unsuccessful on a candidate’s behalf if he believes that the candidate does not really want a job. When I have a candidate who really wants a job I will do everything possible within my power to ensure I get him a job. A good legal recruiter does that.

    I have been quite clear in the past that I believe that most legal recruiters are not all that good at what they do. The reason that most legal recruiters are not all that good is that they are not networked or do not take the effort it requires to nurture individual networks. When you are using someone to network on your behalf, you had better be certain that person is well placed and knows what she is doing. This is essential.

    Given that recruiters charge employers fees, the firms they deal with are likely to be the very best firms, and the candidates they place are likely to be the attorneys coming from the very best firms (or attorneys in lesser firms with narrow skills, or outstanding qualifications). The involvement of a recruiter with these sorts of attorneys is a definite value added, and, in fact, from most law firms it is expected that you are one of these sorts of attorneys. Firms are often suspicious if the best attorneys are not using a recruiter and believe that they are not represented by a recruiter because recruiters think there is something wrong with them!

    Imagine if Brad Pitt approached a major studio and negotiated a major picture deal alone without an agent. The studios would think this is strange and wonder why he was not using an agent. The same holds true of stellar attorneys approaching major law firms. If Brad Pitt approached a small unknown studio used to hiring no-name actors for very little money through an agent, the firm likely would not deal with the agent. It could not afford to deal with the agent and would think that Brad Pitt would be unlikely to do a picture with them anyway. If Brad Pitt approached a small studio on his own without an agent the studio would be delighted and try and sign him up at their low rates. It works the same way if you are a top credentialed attorney coming from a top firm and approaching employers. The dynamic is no different.

    The majority of attorneys-over 90%–do not have the credentials to deal with a top recruiting firm, just as the majority of actors and actresses do not have the credentials to deal with a top agent (or any agent at all). The vast majority of any profession should not be dealing with agents.

    For attorneys looking to change jobs, it can be exceptionally hard to build an effective and large network in a short length of time. This is impossible in most major cities. This is also often impossible with the work schedules that many attorneys are under because they have very little time for anything but work. One such method is to create your own network by applying to all the firms in a given city that match your interests. While this method will not give you the benefit of the relationships that recruiters have, there are other advantages of doing this that outweigh using a recruiter for all but the best attorneys.

    Given the fact that recruiters play a limited role in the job search process for most attorneys, they need to look for ways to network themselves and do so rapidly. This is especially true if an attorney is coming out of law school and looking for an immediate job. This is also especially true if an attorney is relocating to another city where he or she does not know anyone. Finally, this is especially true for most attorneys because they are so concerned and concentrated on the mechanics of what they do that they do not have the time to network at all. When they are looking for a new job they need to establish an immediate network.

    One company I discovered does exactly this for attorneys. It helps attorneys to market themselves. I call this a do-it-yourself public relations and networking firm. This company has been enormously successful for attorneys all over the United States by establishing networks with hiring authorities in a quick and economical way. This company is Legal Authority (www.legalauthority.com). In the absence of formal networks, directly contacting employers you are interested in working for is an excellent job-search method. This company has more than 50 people working for it who track down contacts for attorneys to establish efficient networks.

    Another company I know of to help attorneys establish these networks is LawCrossing (www.lawcrossing.com). This company undertakes the massive task of monitoring the hiring needs of every law firm and corporation in the United States. This company, too, has undertaken a massive effort. The work it does is profound, and there are consistently more than 50,000 jobs on the site.

    Despite my best efforts with BCG Attorney Search, I must admit that nothing can take the place of you doing good old-fashioned networking to establish your value and assist you in getting a job. A legal recruiter has a place in all this; however, you do too. Targeted marketing companies like Legal Authority and job boards like LawCrossing have a place in this; however, you do too. Over time, a good attorney needs to develop strong networks. Without these networks you are going to face obstacles to getting a job.

B. The Importance of Networking to Keeping a Job Inside a Law Firm

You will have a very hard time remaining employed in any law firm for an extended period of time if you cannot network within your law firm. You need a strong network within your employment organization in order to survive.

When I was employed inside law firms, and in all the jobs I have ever held in my life, one thing became clear to me: most often the people that get fired are not fired for performance reasons, but are let go because people do not like them. When someone is fired, it could be one person that does not like them, or it could be several. Let’s examine this for a moment.

If one person does not like you inside a law firm, you might not think you have much of a problem. In fact, there are very few attorneys currently practicing in law firms of more than 10 or so people that do not have “nonfans” within their firm. This is to be expected and is just part of the random ordering of human events, and this occurs inside all organizations.

Nevertheless, if one person does not like you inside a law firm-especially a superior-you are going to need to be on the defensive. One person cannot usually bring you down for non-substantive reasons, but could if you do not have strong networks of support. For example, if one person does not like you, he or she will typically look for small ways to slight you, both in your presence and outside of your presence. He or she may attempt to get all the other attorneys inside of your law firm to dislike you as well. This is no easy task to accomplish. The only way they can accomplish this is (1) if you are not aware of it and (2) if you do not have any defenders inside the law firm who will speak up for you when your detractor speaks negatively of you. The only way you are going to become aware of this and have defenders in your organization is through building a strong network.

Something I hear a lot after I place an attorney with a law firm is a variant of: “Well, I know I am going to do fine here because I am just working hard, keeping my head down and going home at the end of the day. I’m not going to get involved in all the politics of this place like I did where I was before.”

When I used to hear this statement, my thought was that this person was being smart. In retrospect, I believe that there is a lot to be said to being networked inside a law firm. It is true that if you are not networked you do not risk as much upsetting people outside of your day-to-day interactions. Nevertheless, there are ways to play networking too. You do not want to go too far with your networking. It is a bad idea, of course, to sleep with people in the office, say stupid things about your boss behind his or her back, and backstab other attorneys when you are out after work, and so forth. This can get you into trouble, and some of this stuff is likely to occur if you do not maintain a certain distance. Nevertheless, you should have strong and stable networks at work.

A network inside a law firm can tell you which partners to avoid. A network can tell you which partners have the most power, even when it is not evident. A network can tell you which associates are on the way out. A network can tell you who has a lot of work if you do not currently have a lot of work. All of these things that a network provides are quite useful and can assist you with growing in your firm. In fact, access to this sort of information is essential to your success and survival inside of a law firm. Without networks, you will not have access to this sort of information and will be penalized for this lack of knowledge.

C. Why Unnetworked Legal Careers Die.

Networking is extremely important to both getting a job and keeping a job inside a law firm. While an entire treatise could be written about the value of networking, I think it is useful to examine how an inability to network can kill your legal career. Of the many things that can kill your legal career, or even prevent it from taking off, the inability to network is one of the strongest.

When I was in college, I was a very good student and knew all of the other 10 or so really good students in my class because we were all nominated by the school for Rhodes Scholarships, Fulbright Scholarships, and other sorts of things, and the school had a few meetings where they got all of us together to discuss this and other stuff. None of us in this little group got Rhodes Scholarships that year, and so most of us applied to law school. Then most of us waited until March or whenever the results of our applications rolled in.

One of those students was particularly close with one our professors, and I remember thinking that this woman was somewhat of a brown noser and did not understand why one student would spend so much time chatting with this particular professor. This professor was also someone who was quite well known in the national academic community. At some point in their professional relationship, this woman had told the professor that a certain law school (which at the time was the number-one law school in the United States) was her first choice. She told me this one evening when we were at some event or another discussing where we were applying to law school.

A couple of days before the deadline for law school applications were due, she sent hers in. Something quite remarkable then happened. Within five days of sending her application across the country to this law school, she had received an acceptance letter from the law school back in the mail. She was accepted at the top law school in the United States the very same day it had received her application. The rest of us mortals had to wait for months. This was a lesson for me in the value of networks and their importance even at this early stage in my exposure to the legal profession. Not only had this woman done an exceptional job networking with her professor, the professor had obviously done an even better job networking with some people inside the number-one law school. He did such an outstanding job, in fact, that I doubt they even needed to read her application. I saw something similar to this again a couple of years later.

When I was in my second year of law school, I was sitting outside the office of a law professor who is quite famous nationally. I was waiting to speak with him about a paper I was writing for his class. During my time at the law school, I had noticed that he spent a lot of time chatting with another law student in the halls and that this student was often present on one or two occasions when I had stopped by this professor’s office to chat about the same paper. The two of them were always debating about some intellectual topic or another. Once again, I pegged the woman talking to the professor as a brown noser. I remember thinking, at the time, that she was wasting her time talking about all this intellectual gobbly gook with the professor, and if she were smart she would spend more time studying. I had some mutual acquaintances of this law student and knew she was an average, but not stellar, student. What I heard on that particular day was quite astonishing to me and something I will likely never forget.

The professor was talking to a law firm and said something like the following:

“Grades are fine. She will work hard. I have already talked to X firm and Y firm, and they are not making her an offer. She belongs with you, and if you make her an offer, she will accept it. She’s perfect for you guys. I already spoke to Z in your firm, and he told me that he would make an exception on the grades for me.”

I had no idea this sort of thing went on. Needless to say, the student ended up at one of the top law firms in the United States. In fact, some people might say it is the top law firm in the United States.

What is so interesting about all of this is that this sort of thing happens every day. Somewhere in your midst there is a powerful person who can get you started-as these two people got their boost-from powerful, networked and well-known professors. If these students had not taken the time to get networked with these professors as they did, the results they achieved might not have occurred. Here, these students did an exceptional job networking with simply one person. Imagine the results you can get over the course of your legal career if you network and put yourself in the corner of 10, 20, 50, or 100+ people like that. You would be very surprised. It is possible.

How does a man from a blue-collar family in Arkansas become President of the United States? How does a Hollywood actor become President of the United States? I once heard somewhere that Bill Clinton never forgot a face of anyone he met. While I am not sure that is true, I am sure there is some element of truth. I have heard numerous stories of Bill Clinton walking up to people he met only for a moment 20 or 30 years previously and saying hello and asking about particulars of the person’s life such as their family from that time in the past.

All over the United States there are well-networked attorneys whose careers are in the stratosphere. People like Johnnie Cochran, Jeffrey Fieger, Greta Van Susteren, and others. None of these people would likely be considered a good attorney by many big firm litigators. They are considered good attorneys by most of the public, and they are the people that Americans look to when they are interested in knowing about the law. I would argue that whatever you say about these attorneys’ education or big firm experience, they would not care. They are more influential, more connected, more known, and make more money than probably 99.5% of all big firm attorneys. These are all people with a great deal of power because they are networked and connected to the American people.

In the large firm arena, aside from the media, there are thousands of attorneys who are very well networked both inside and outside their law firms. They are so well networked that their firms would likely never risk losing them. These are the law school classmates who call you every six months to see how you are doing. These are the people you meet that know tons of people all around the country. These are also the sorts of attorneys who have the most business and the most power inside their law firms. These are the sorts of people that really succeed in the practice of law. They succeed because of their ability to connect all over the place and with numerous types of people.

If you fail to network with associates or partners inside your firm, you will eventually run into problems inside your own firm. If you fail to network outside of your firm, you will have more difficulty getting a job and will likely have a difficult time ever getting business and therefore having security within your firm. Attorneys who fail in the practice of law and many of those who leave the practice of law do so because they don’t network.

One of the more typical things I see in my job as a legal recruiter are partners from major law firms who have no business. These partners rose through the associate ranks based upon their hard work, dedication, and demonstrated skill set. They also rose because some partner within their firm had enough work to support them at the partner level. They would not have risen had someone not had a lot of business.

This is a very precarious position to be in. When a partner does not have a substantial book of portable business, he or she will be let go and asked to look for a job if the work the firm is doing dries up. It cannot be any other way. A partner needs to be self sustaining in terms of his or her work for his or her survival. If the partner sits in his/her office all day and night and does nothing but churn out legal work, his or her contribution is limited to that. If he/she tries to bring in his own work and work that others can do, his or her contribution is far greater. The firm wants to keep him or her around.

Without networking outside the law firm, the partner has nothing but their skills to offer and may eventually lose their job. They will certainly never likely have the high standing within their firm that those who bring in the work do. I have seen partners from AmLaw 100 law firms hang up their own shingle and do divorces after they were let go because they had no clients and the firm stopped giving them work. In some extreme cases, I have seen partners like this do things like open a diner in a small town and make less than $20,000 a year. Regardless of whether they are happy in their new job, these partners would have been on a far different track had they learned how to network.

You need to understand that your entire career is dependent upon networking, and longevity is not possible without it. If you do not network, and do so consistently, you will likely eventually be in trouble.

Conclusions

Networking is one of the most fundamental necessities for long-term success in the practice of law. Your legal career depends on networking from the time you are in law school until the time you retire.

One of the greatest tragedies of the law school education and the practice of law is that the importance of networking is barely emphasized (if at all). With the advent of mega law firms over the past 50 years, the importance of networking is still there-and more important than ever-but many attorneys do not realize it because they are insulated by mounds of work. With great amounts of work coming from partners, a young attorney’s superiors will not necessarily tell their subordinates the importance of networking either.

The way to succeed in the practice of law is to form networks and go out and use those networks.

When I first started practicing law, one of my good friends who made partner that same year told me: “You do not have to work all the time and need to realize that no partner in this firm is ever going to tell you that. It is not in their best interest. You need to make time for yourself on your own. If you work all the time, you’ll never have time to do the things you want to do for yourself.”

How true. The same logic applies to networking. No one is going to tell you to network. It is not in their best interest. You need to network because if you do not do this, you will not have anywhere near the legal career you could have if you did network.

Looking for Greener Pastures

You are a partner at a solid firm where you generate a respectable book of business on an annual basis. You feel your career at your current firm is heading toward a perpetual stagnation. You feel that you lack the resources to build your practice, or you view the firm’s overall commitment to client relations or service as inadequate. Worse yet, you believe the culture or prestige of the firm has suffered because of the actions of your partners. Perhaps you have great concern regarding the firm’s profitability or compensation structure. Or you question the management in guiding the firm through the uncertain future. Whatever the reason, you are contemplating leaving your firm to improve your unfulfilled expectations.

But taking your practice to another firm is complicated and requires extensive effort on your part to make sure your future home satisfies those concerns that you deemed deficient at your current firm.

The first and most important aspect of conducting your search is maintaining confidentiality. If word gets out that you are thinking about leaving your firm, the consequences could be harsh both to your professional development and for your clients. The most secure way to maintain confidentiality is to use a competent attorney search firm. In addition to maintaining confidentiality, there are two significant tasks that the search firm would handle on your behalf.

Second, the search firm should first provide an honest assessment of your marketability to potential firms, highlighting your strong and weak attributes. One of the most important determinants of your success in the marketplace today is your total book of business. Other related matters include your billing rate and utilization.

Third, the search firm should provide you with an appraisal of the market and how your candidacy will fare in the marketplace. A good recruiter should have anecdotal information regarding potential firms that would be beneficial to your search. Perhaps the firm is in talks to acquire a practice group that would require someone with your expertise. Sometimes, unending merger talks are demoralizing and may encourage exodus of highly productive partners to others firms.

Finally, the recruiter should undertake an affirmative search on your behalf. It is important that the recruiter not disclose you while conducting an affirmative search. The recruiter should have a complete understanding of why you want to switch firms and must diligently examine potential firms in the marketplace to determine the best firms that exhibit traits that would be a good fit for you and your practice.

Relations of partners to a firm are similar to being in a marriage. It used to be taboo for a partner to quit a firm to join another firm, but just like marriage the unthinkable has become more common. The common argument to support this is that if you are unhappy, why stay?

However, departing without a thoughtful analysis of all the pros and cons could be a huge mistake. Here is a list of issues - which is not listed in order of importance - to consider when you contemplate jumping ship.

  1. Firm debt. We have all read or heard about Brobeck and the havoc it has wreaked on the lives of partners who stayed too long. A firm’s debt undoubtedly is owned by the partners and it is a mistake to ignore it. Can you imagine if you had joined the firm 6 months prior to it dissolving?
  2. Is profitability important to you? Would you be more interested in a firm that has $1 million profit per partner, or would you rather prefer a firm that is less profitable but provides a less demanding environment. There are plenty of firms that provide a better “quality of life” environment that are attractive to lawyers who are just as well-regarded and reputable as those in highly profitable firms. Also, is the firm highly leveraged with regard to partner/associate ratio, which may be indicative of lack of productivity on the partnership?
  3. Compensation. What is the structure of the partnership? Would you be eligible for income or equity partnership? Partner compensations also are important in order to attract other talent. Maybe your clients require top quality tax work, but because of compensation issues the partner who handles such work leaves because she is unhappy with the compensation structure. Also, top associates will flock to better paying firms unless there is something to counter the attraction of the greenback. Perhaps, the firm provides a better quality of life, or allows associates to focus in their desired practice area, or provides associates with real partnership potential.
  4. Would the billing rates of the firm discourage your existing or potential clients from sending work your way? The worst thing to do is to change firms, and later find your clients balking from raising the billing rates even though they may have agreed to it earlier.
  5. A conflict with your existing clients is an obvious problem. But how about conflicts with potential clients? So many partners pick up and leave firms after a large piece of business is refused by their firm because of an institutional client of the firm.
  6. Although people subtly focus on it, the culture of firm one wants to join is very important. Applying the philosopher Isaiah Berlin’s definition of culture to a firm it would be its “goals, values and pictures of the world” that are demonstrated in its actions, relations internally and externally, rules and routine practices of its members who are self-monitoring. You won’t find it written anywhere, but you feel it when you walk through its halls.
  7. Is the firm democratically or autocratically run? Nothing drives people crazy like a renegade managing partner who makes significant decisions without consulting or informing his partners. It could be as simple as changing the firm’s corporate credit cards, causing embarrassment to partners when attempting to pay for client lunches, to taking on more debt than was agreed during the last partnership meeting.
  8. Can the firm service your clients? Does the firm have the requisite expertise that is essential for your clients? Does the firm value providing top client service, or is the firm more interested in business generation? Does the firm have an office in a city that is important to your clients? For example, clients who need access to the capital markets require a firm to have a New York office. Or, clients that need regulatory services desire to hire a firm that has a Washington, DC office.
  9. Is the firm’s prestige critical to you, your clients’, or your reputation?

Although this is not an exhaustive list, thinking about these issues beforehand would make the process painless, interesting and, hopefully, rewarding at the end. At BCG, our recruiters stand ready to assist you in exploring opportunities in a new firm.

Transitioning to a Law Firm from In-House

I would like to transition back to law firm life after working in-house for the last six years — what kind of hurdles should I expect?

Of course, every case is going to be different, but as more and more of the in-house attorney workforce attempts to make the move back to law firm life, they are finding out it is not as easy as it once was to obtain a position at a law firm. As everyone is probably aware of, the downturn in the economy has meant that a lot of in-house positions that arose in the past have disappeared. These attorneys are finding it harder to find positions in law firms than those who stuck it out in law firms for several reasons. Here are some ways of getting around that:

  1. Many law firms want to believe that the sole purpose of your life is to come in every morning and bill hours in the name of the firm. While it is not necessarily true that attorneys who stuck around the law firm scene are more willing to believe this, many firms will take your in-house experience to mean you were trying to get away from the more demanding workload that law firms require. One way to get around that is to seek out so-called “lifestyle firms” or firms that don’t necessarily expect you to bill 2,500 hours a year and will probably not hold you to such a high standard when it comes to your dedication to law firm life.
  2. Another reason that law firms can sometimes be hesitant to take on attorneys that have been working in-house is that they believe that the work required in corporate environments is not as strenuous as that required in a law firm. This can translate to them not believing that you can handle the work that they need their employees to do. Emphasize the work you have done that is on par with work that law firm attorneys do in your resume and make your prior law firm work prominent.
  3. Law firms like attorneys that are going to be loyal. Despite the fact that more attorneys are switching firms than ever before, partners like the idea that the attorney they hire laterally will try to make a home in that firm for a long while. By leaving law firms altogether, you have already made them suspect. Perhaps this is not as easy to get around as the others, but if you truly emphasize how much you desire to work in a law firm, some employers will take that into consideration.

Last, but far from least - if you can bring work from your former corporate employer to the law firm, that would (for obvious reasons) be a big bonus in getting you hired. This may not be feasible, but if it is, it could go a long way to getting you any law firm job you want, especially if the business you bring with you could potentially net the firm a lot of money.

A great tool to organize multi-step projects - MindManager

Almost every project you are going to work on involves multiple steps.  The better you can organize and manage these multi-step projects, the more efficient and effective you will be.  In this post, I want to share a very cool program I’ve been using for a number of years.

When I was practicing law, I used to work with a partner who organized all of his cases on one MS Word document.  Whether it was a client opinion letter or a huge litigation, each project had one document and he would go through and write all of the steps on a different line.  Once each step/task was completed, he would write a small “x” to the right of the task.

All of us who worked with this partner considered ourselves very fortunate to have the luxury of working with a partner who actually had a document that contained all of the steps.  Unlike working with other litigation partners–many who simply had the entire litigation process in their head and didn’t feel the need to reduce it to paper–the benefit of having a map of the case on a single document was tremendously helpful.

This was in 2003, and technology has come a long way since.

Over the past few years, I have been relying heavily on a fantastic software program called MindManager (made by MindJet), which allows you to “map” (similar to the process of diagramming/branching) multi-step projects onto a very user-friendly software program.  (If you’re interested in this type of thing, check out www.mindjet.com).

It allows you to modify and change these maps in so many ways that make it easy to “see” what most people try to store in their heads.  The process of mind mapping is becoming extremely popular because it engages both the analytical side and visual side of the brain.  It’s hard to explain, but if you try it, you will quickly understand how it adds a completely new dimension to the way you view your projects.  I have tried many project management software programs, and MindJet is liberating in a way I have never experienced.  It

Had the partner I worked with a few years ago used something like this, our dinky case management documents would have been taken to a whole new level.  We would have been able to collaborate, highlight, add tasks, color code, delegate more easily, and have fun with a whole bunch of other features.

But it goes much beyond organizing multi-step projects.  You can also use it to brainstorm, give presentations, manage your to-do list in a visual manner, and simploy “dump” everything that is lingering in your head that you need to get down on paper.

Since I am no longer working in a law firm, I don’t know if this type of software has yet caught on.  But it’s only a matter of time before it does because it makes complex, multi-step projects much more manageable.  For lawyers that spend much of their days managing multi-step projects, this could truly be a lifesaver if you are the type of person who likes to see everything laid out in front of you.

I have only used MIndManager and recently learned that they have a number of other programs (such as online collaboration tools, which could be good for multi-office collaboration), which I hope to try soon.  But if this intrigues you, check it out - they have free trial downloads.

The Best Way to Prepare for a Job Search and Interviews

Several years ago when looking for a position in Los Angeles I interviewed with numerous law firms.  In virtually every one of these interviews I ran across an attorney who knew not one, not two, not three—but numerous, numerous attorneys in my current firm.  If this is the case in a market the size of Los Angeles (and the market in Los Angeles is huge), I cannot even imagine what it must be like in smaller markets.  For example, I am from Detroit.  I grew up in  a suburb of Detroit.  When it came time for me to decide where to work in law school, when I started interviewing with firms in Detroit I knew many of the attorneys before I even arrived at the interviews–they were the parents of people I grew up with.

The following are my suggestions for the best way to prepare for a job search and interviews:

1. Know you are always being watched, observed and judged

When I was in high school I remember that one of the best looking girls in my school was known to be a prude and someone who would date boys but never let anything all that exciting happen.  She was also a star athlete and a student counsel leader and a very respected student.  My parents were divorced and lived about an hour apart.  I lived with my father.  The funny thing is that this same girl also had parents who were divorced and spent a lot of time in one city visiting a parent.  The funny thing about this girl was she had the exact opposite reputation in the city where she did not live full time.  Her strategy it seemed, like the strategy of many, was to have two separate personas.  She knew that if she behaved one way in her school and around people there she would experience fall out.  She also knew that by keeping her “wild side” in another town this would not affect her directly in her own back yard.

In life we are always being observed.  We are being observed in our communities.  We are being observed in our jobs.  We are being observed by our peers.  We are being observed by our superiors.  There are a lot of people out there who understand that.  The smart woman discussed above certainly understood that (albeit, in a different context).

When I went to look for a job in Detroit, despite the fact that I had not spent time in the city since high school I already knew which firms I would likely get jobs in and which ones I likely would not.  This had nothing to do with the prestige of the firm-it had to do with the people inside the firms.  I knew that I had been close to certain people growing up and their parents like me.  I also knew that I had not been close with others and had made some enemies along the way.  Sure enough, when I started applying for jobs in Detroit I was preceded by my past.  The Detroit legal community is small enough that most people know one another.

In everything you do in the public arena you are likely being observed, watched and judged.  The people you need today will likely have some impact over events that may happen to you tomorrow.  It is as simple as that.  Like the woman discussed above, you need to do everything you can to maintain a strong public face at all costs.

One thing about interviewing in law firms is that there will likely almost always be someone there you have known from a time before.  That person will likely have a say in what is happening to you in your new position.  Be aware of this and you will be preparing for interviews every second of every day.

2. Remember that the best lawyers can spot other good lawyers and you cannot “fake it”-you are always preparing for interviews just by doing a good job with your current work

There are many people out there who go to work in jobs and for whatever reason are not challenged.  Most often the people who claim they are not challenged are the same people who go out of the way to not challenge themselves.  We all know the type of person who does not challenge themselves in the job.  These are the sorts of people always looking for shortcuts and other methods to do as little work as possible.  I have never understood this sort of person-but they are there.  This sort of person is also the same one who is likely to be very defensive when asked about something they do not know but think they should know-”oh, I already know that!” they will say.

When you are good at something and really doing your job you have the tendency to get “immersed” in your subject matter.  Over time the subject matter and its intricacies and innuendos becomes almost second nature to the good student.  You also become more astute and a level or presumed understanding emerges between people who understand the subject matter well.  Little tidbits and other bits of understanding emerge.  Two people who are very good at something share a similar understanding.

When you are interviewing with a truly excellent lawyer, they will also be able to tell if you share this level of understanding.  If you are a slacker and not a hard worker, or someone who does not consistently challenge their mind, they will see right through this.  This level of understanding is particularly important at the higher levels.  You need to always be working hard and doing good legal work even when you may not want to make long-term plans to be at your current firm.  This is essential.

3. You need to go into your job with a sincere and 100% desire to make it work and switch jobs infrequently-if at all

Until the 1980s, the majority of workers in America and in law firms rarely changed jobs-if at all.  One of the major changes that happened was when the Japanese started importing cheaper and better cars into the United States.  American car makers (a major industry at the time) could no longer afford to be as loyal to their employees and mass firings and layoffs became increasingly commonplace.  Furthermore, pensions were fairly rapidly phased out at most companies in favor of 401ks-because employees began to be more “portable” in their jobs.  Much of the changes that were occurring in corporate America soon found themselves into law firms and other legal hiring organizations.

Despite that fact that attorneys can switch jobs at a whim in the current economic climate, switch jobs is not always the smartest thing to do.  Young lawyers (especially) like to feel as if they are in control and more valued by their employers than they value them.  In addition, young attorneys are likely to move for a slight bump in salary, an attorney in the firm they do not like, or some other trivial sort of factor.

These are not good reasons to move.  In fact, there are few good reasons to leave most legal employers.  The best reason and the only reason is if there is something inside your current firm that is so endemic to the firm and so pervasive that unless you leave your career will never go forward.  These factors also should be near 100% beyond your control.  When you join an employer it is much like getting married.  If you show a lot of commitment to your current employer you will be respected if you have to leave due to factors outside of your control.

The reason all of this is important is because the person interviewing you wants to trust you.  If the person or organization interviewing you does not trust you and believes you may leave for a trivial reason then they are will be unlikely to hire you.  If your reason for leaving is sound and the next firm who hires you believes you are likely to remain on board in the face of adversity then they are more likely to hire you.  People want to have people with staying power in their organizations.  No organization is perfect and all organizations go through ups and downs.

Conclusions
In everything you do-both inside and outside of work-you are always preparing for your job search and interviews.  You need to remember that the time to prepare for interviews and a job search is before you ever know you will need to prepare.  Being a good attorney and a job searcher is something that takes the same amount of time and effort to achieve.

An Alternative to Lay-offs: Simpson Thacher’s New Public Service Fellowship Program

Unless you are trapped underground, you are well aware of the massive layoffs taking place across the country in just about every major (and not so major) law firm. Associates have obviously been hit the hardest, and the results are not pretty. Thousands of young attorneys with minimal experience, lots of debt and no jobs are looking for high paying firm jobs where none exist. It’s depressing, to say the least.

But one firm has done something that could serve as a creative alternative to the mass associates cuts. Simpson Thacher & Bartlett announced the creation of a new Public Service Fellowship Program, through which associates can take one year to work on a public service project of their choosing, and at the end of the year, the firm will give them the option of returning to the firm. During the year-long fellowship, an associate who participates will receive a $60,000 stipend from the firm.

To me, this is the perfect alternative to cutting associate jobs. Lord knows there are plenty of non-profit legal organizations and public services agencies who would gladly host a public interest fellow, and while $60,000 is significantly less than the salaries of Simpson Thacher associates, I like to think that even the greediest of associates would consider taking this opportunity to give back in exchange for not losing one’s job. Plus, the firm saves significant money on associate salaries for the year of the service project and won’t have to interview for new associates when the economy bounces back (because it WILL bounce back, no matter how bad things appear right now).

So, which firms are going to follow suit? So far, I have not heard of any other firms doing so, but I most certainly hope they do. Anything to slow the layoffs down, increase morale among young attorneys and promote public service work.

Suddenly, I am feeling a bit jealous that there was no massive recession like the current one while I was practicing law at a big firm. That’s just twisted, isn’t it?

How Valuable is an LLM?

There is no question that an LLM degree in a particular discipline can be quite prestigious, but let’s tackle the issue of whether obtaining one will meaningfully increase your chances of obtaining a better position.

LLM degrees are not for everyone. But they can be beneficial to some attorneys. For foreign lawyers who have obtained their law degrees in other countries, obtaining an LLM degree may be the only way that they will be able to get licensed in certain states. We have seen a marked increase in the number of foreign attorneys who have come to the United States hoping to find meaningful work opportunities here once they have received their LLM and passed the bar in a particular state. Sadly, not all of these attorneys have fared well in the job market here. However, without question, if they are interested in returning to their native country with their U.S. LLM in hand, these attorneys are likely to be highly regarded and may even have a strong shot at being hired by a US firm doing business with an office in their own country.

For attorneys in this country, an LLM degree may or may not be a suitable choice, depending upon the practice area. For instance, an experienced civil and white-collar criminal trial lawyer without a technical undergraduate degree may not benefit from obtaining an LLM in intellectual property law. Intellectual property law in the areas of copyright and trademark, as well as technology and licensing have recently been badly hit by the collapse of the tech sector, and consequently, many attorneys in this area have been hard pressed to find work, despite their strong credentials and expertise in this practice area. For recent law school graduates, particularly those with little to no practical hands-on work experience in the area of intellectual property law, obtaining an LLM may not be a suitable choice at this juncture in their career.

Not all LL.M. degrees are created equal. One of the most respected LLM degrees to receive is in the area of tax law. Indeed, many firms make it almost a prerequisite that their tax attorneys have also gone on at some point in their career to obtain an LLM in tax, regardless of whether their practice area is corporate and partnership tax, international tax, or even ERISA and employee benefits. Consequently, many graduating law students, particularly in this market and especially if they are not graduating from a top tier law school, may find it useful to go right on for an extra year of study in order to have the added cache and prestige of an LLM in tax.

Tax law is obviously not for everyone. But it is a specialty that will always be in demand and many tax lawyers are capable of handling a number of transactional business matters in addition to their tax counseling and advisory work. Very few corporate transactional lawyers can say the same for being able to also do the quite complicated tax aspects of a business deal. In the areas of ERISA and employee benefits law, so few lawyers have this expertise, that the added cache of an LLM makes them an attractive candidate to virtually any quality law firm, even if the attorney did not originally graduate from a top-tier law school.

The same cannot necessarily be said of other practice areas. While there is no question that an extra year of specialized law studies in a particular practice area, whether it be international law or intellectual property, or health care law, will certainly enhance one’s resume, it is unlikely that an LLM will in and of itself make the difference in your job search.

Not all LL.M. programs are created equal. US News and World Report publishes a yearly report on the best law schools in the United States. Resources such as these are available to help you research what law school excels both across the board, and with respect to certain specialties. In considering an LLM program, do your due diligence and speak with the school’s placement office and find out the number of recent graduates who received job offers upon completion of their studies. Find out which law firms came on campus to the school to actually recruit for attorneys from the program. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, bear in mind that, with the exception of a few truly top ranked law schools such as Columbia or N.Y.U. which probably have a number of law firms from several parts of the country recruiting on campus, most LLM programs only attract indigenous law firms. Consequently, if you want to practice as a healthcare attorney in Florida, don’t go for an LL.M. in healthcare law in Ohio. No matter how successful that particular school’s placement record is in Ohio, there is little chance a Florida firm will be knocking on your door.

Conclusion. While an LLM can be a prestigious credential for some attorneys, it is not a panacea, even in a poor economy, for recent law school graduates with little to no work experience in that practice area. The most notable exception to this is in the tax arena. For experienced attorneys seeking to jump-start their careers or change practice areas, an LLM may prove useful, provided the practice area is in demand and provided the school they choose has a good track record.

To Boutique or Not to Boutique

Recently, I spoke with a senior associate that was working at a boutique firm.  She had been there for less than a year and had previously worked for a number of years at an AmLaw 100 law firm.   In speaking with her, I could hear the frustration in her voice about having made a move that she thought was definitely the wrong move for her career.  She was obviously a very bright and accomplished attorney, but I got the sense that she felt like she had somehow failed for not having considered the significant differences that can exist between large firm practice and some boutique environments before she made the move.  She was being far too hard on herself — but for the benefit of those considering such a move, below are some of the more significant differences we discussed which I think are worth noting.

1. Resources/Technology.   Often associates coming from large firm practice don’t realize just how accustomed they have become to the every day resources allotted them in large firms.  These resources include such things as updated computer systems, having a lap top and blackberry, upgraded phone systems, the ability to work remotely and accessibility to a night staff.  Associates often take these resources for granted and consider them to be standard in the industry.  The reality is that some smaller firms don’t have the expanded resources of larger firms.  There can be significant trade offs moving from a large firm environment to a smaller firm, and one of the trade offs may be fewer resources.

2. Billable Hours/Face Time.  Working in a firm of 20 to 30 attorneys is dramatically different than coming to work and having the ability to “loose” oneself in a firm of 500 attorneys.  In a smaller firm environment, irregardless of whether you might be working remotely, if you are not in the office everyone knows it – and it is often not looked upon favorably.    For whatever reason, smaller firms tend to be harder on their associates regarding actually being in the office. Perhaps it is because these firms tend to be so leanly staffed and they need what few associates they may have to be immediately accessible at all times.  Of course, this is not true of every small firm, but it is definitely something I hear from attorneys who have come from large firm practice and are accustomed to managing their day/billing time, whether they are physically in the office or not.  In addition, associates who have transitioned to a smaller firm for fewer billable hours may find that because these firms tend to be so leanly staffed, the billable hour expectation can actually end up being much higher.

3. Culture.  Although many smaller firms can provide excellent cultures, the size of some of these firms makes it impossible to “escape” the grip of a difficult partner.  Whereas in a large firm, if an associate is having trouble with a partner in a particular group, he/she may be able to simply fill his/her plate with work from other partners, thus avoiding “combat, in a smaller firm it is virtually impossible to avoid anyone.

4. Sophisticated Clients and Work.  Some boutique firms have very high profile clients that spin-off sophisticated work – and some don’t.  An associate should ask for and evaluate a list of a firm’s Top 10 representative clients and matters which have been most recently serviced by the firm.   Another consideration is the length of time these particular clients have been with the firm.

5. Viability of the Firm’s Practice Focus/Financial Stability of Firm.  A boutique’s practice focus can have everything to do with its viability for the long-term, particularly in an economic downturn like the one we are currently experiencing.  For example, a real estate boutique that has not expanded its practice capabilities may suffer tremendously in a down cycle.  Depending on the size of the firm, its client base and financial stability may not survive a tough cycle.  Thus, before joining a boutique focused in a particular specialty, associates should consider both the short- and long-term effects the economy would have on a firm’s viability.

6. Compensation.  Many associates are willing to take a cut in pay for promised lower billable hour expectations.  Although some smaller firms may actually live up to these promises, associates may find that they are billing at the same levels, but are receiving considerably less compensation.

7. Power in the Hands of a Few.  It is fairly common for a few name partners in a small firm to have control over most if not all of the decisions being made about the firm.  These partners often maintain control over all of the clients, the strategic growth of the firm and have the power to decide how particular associates will progress at the firm.  Thus, exploring whether making partner is actually possible and the path for progression at the firm is very important for any associate transitioning from a large firm.

8. Mentorship.  In large firms, mentoring relationships for associates often come about as a result of formal mentor assignments or naturally via consistent work with a particular partner.  Because of the nature of how small firms generally manage their cases and time, and primarily because of lean staffing on cases, what often occurs in small firms is that associates are thrown into the pool to “sink or swim”.  This is not necessarily intentional on the part of partners, but is often a result of a lack of real time to allocate toward practical training.  Of course, some associates leave large firm practice to gain hands on experience, so this “sink or swim” opportunity may be just what they are looking for.

There are definitely many advantages to moving to a boutique which we have not discussed here, but being cognizant of some of the adjustments you may have to make may save you from regretting such a move down the road.

Is Success Addictive?

Are you placing too much emphasis on professional achievement in order to derive your own self esteem. That’s a diagnosis offered in today’s WSJ (subscription req.)

While there is nothing wrong with striving for high levels of achievement (and as any parent knows, achievement is the cornerstone of self esteem), the problem arises when professional achievement becomes your principal source of self esteem. In the current economic climate, it is NOT easy to achieve professional success in the short run.  You are therefore not being fair to yourself if your self worth is being measured by the money you have in the bank right now.

If you haven’t been laid off, your workload may be slow. If you are responsible for generating work at your firm, you are probably finding it harder to generate billings (unless you happen to be involved in providing legal services that relate in some way to advising distressed companies or individuals).

In the long run, I think the current economic crisis will force more lawyers to reevaluate their priorities (e.g. why did I go to law school? what do I really want to do with my life? how can I use the added free time to improve my relationships with my friends, children, spouse and family?)

Personally, I’ve rediscovered cooking and my wife and I are eating better. I spend more time with our children, our dog gets more exercise, I’m following up with old friends more frequently and I’m taking care of little annoying car and house related projects that have been on the back burner for a long time.

It’s not that I’m not working hard (in many ways, I’m focusing more energy than ever on identifying business opportunities). But I’m trying to focus more on other parts of my life to derive self esteem.

So what are you doing to build self esteem during these challenging times? Hint: focus on areas of your life where you have more control! If you do focus on the professional, reward yourself for being successful at networking and don’t be too hard on yourself when clients are not ready to spend their legal dollars.