How to Cope With a Change in Employment Status

We regularly read and hear that “jobs for life” are disappearing, to be replaced by a pattern of consecutive jobs and unpredictable career dislocations. When the time comes to face such a change on a personal level, these statistics take on a whole new meaning.

The emotions one experiences during a change of employment status are entirely normal. Although no two people react exactly the same way, most of us experience a range of emotions that includes shock, denial, anger, worry, depression, resistance, relief, acceptance, and the need to take action.

Fortunately, a change in employment status does not have to lead to a gloomy spiral of events. Your initial feelings of anger, frustration, and despair can and will be overcome and eventually replaced by feelings of acceptance and control.

By thinking positively, taking appropriate action and looking toward the future, this transition can become an opportunity to secure a more satisfying position. Throughout this process, your recruiter can help you take constructive and creative steps towards developing a positive job campaign, and moving to the next step of your career.

Facing the World during Your Job Search

Family, friends, neighbors, and colleagues may already be asking you “What happened with your job?” This is a question you will frequently hear as you begin your job search. It is important to handle this question capably, regardless of who asks it. Therefore, one of the first things you should do is develop a response that is truthful and acceptable to you and prospective employers. When creating your response, you should consider applying the following: (1) keeping it short and factual, (2) be as positive as possible, and (3) put your best foot forward, but remain truthful.

• Keeping it Short: Generally, the more you try to explain, the more difficult your explanation becomes. You should prepare a short, to the point statement, and be prepared to answer follow-up questions, but only if they are asked.
• Be as Positive as Possible: Negative statements about your former boss or employing organization will only hurt you. The last think you want to do is burn bridges, or give a prospective employer the impression that you are a disgruntled employee. By keeping your statement as positive as possible, you will only help to advance your candidacy.
• Put Your Best Foot Forward, But Remain Truthful: There are a number of factors that result in someone leaving. Explain them to your recruiter, he or she will help you determine reasons that are most positive and easiest to explain, while remaining truthful.

What It Takes to Succeed

First, it is important for you to believe that you will succeed in your job search. In order to do this, you should take some time and determine your strengths, and clarify your objectives. The following steps will help you put together an effective plan for your job search, and help you create a strategic plan with your recruiter:

• Take Stock: You should identify past successes, current strengths, overall work style, and personal preferences.
• Refine Your Career Objectives: You should be clear, focused, and realistic about your career objectives, based on your past work experience and academic credentials.
• Work with Your Recruiter to Make a Dynamic Presentation: Your recruiter will help you to draft an effective resume, and review interview skills, so that you may be at your highest level of effectiveness when approaching a potential employer.
• Work with Your Recruiter to Create a Marketing Strategy: Your recruiter will help create an effective marketing strategy on your behalf, in terms of firm selection, and the type of presentation to be made to these firms.
• Be Persistent: The job process can be a long and challenging one, but your commitment to the search and implementation of your recruiter’s plan will give you the best chances to ensure a successful outcome.

Job loss can be a very emotionally traumatic experience. In fact, it ranks among the highest of all stress-causing situations. However, rather than looking at a job loss as a horrible thing, you should focus on its positive aspects. Remember, this might be an opportunity for you to find a more rewarding position. Be open to opportunities. You never know what doors this turn of events may open for you.

Lawyers Losing Interest in Partnership

Associates’ Views on Partnership Has Shifted

Today’s associates are not necessarily as interested in making partner as they once were. For some, it seems more unattainable and less desirable than it has been for associates in the past. This is especially true coming out of a recession, when firms are typically electing fewer partners. As a result, there appears to be a definite shift in the goals of some of today’s law firm associates.

Increasingly, lawyers are now more focused on using their time at law firms to gain work experience and earn money, without having to commit long-term. Associates often leave law firms before they can even be considered for partner, either by moving in-house or out of the profession entirely. In fact, we’ve met some associates who go to law firms without any intention of staying there long enough to be a partner. Law firms do not always discourage such attitudes since economically they can’t make everyone partner.

There are many reasons why associates quit, including poor performance reviews, the pressure of billable-hour requirements, and family obligations. Another very common reason why associates leave their firms is the lack of perceived opportunity for advancement. Especially in extremely large law firms, associates believe making partner is out of their grasp. And, for many, it is true. The bar is certainly higher to become an equity partner. The saying, “you work hard and pay your dues and you’ll make partner” no longer always applies. Partnership is not just about a well-developed skill set or technical expertise in a practice area, but also the associate’s potential to be a savvy business developer.

Road to Partnerships Is Getting Longer

The fast track at top law firms is slowing down. Major law firms are sometimes prolonging the period leading up to partnership because of the desire for more experienced associates, an active market for lateral partners, and greater pressure to improve profitability. At firms where an associate’s first shot at partnership once came around seven years after law school graduation, it can now come around 10 years after, or longer.

Partners want associates to have more experience. However, at the same time, clients are demanding leaner staffing on matters thereby resulting in fewer opportunities for associates to gain experience. And in a down economy, there are fewer deals where associates can build their skills. Also, lateral hiring of partners with business results in a large pool of homegrown senior associates who have to wait for partnership consideration. Further, there is another pool of lateral senior associate hires who usually have to face a prolonged wait for partnership as well, especially since firms often take their time to reach a high comfort level with associates who were trained elsewhere. Finally, because low partnership numbers drive up profits per partner, firms may be wary of making a large number of even well-qualified associates partners.

What Is Left for Those Who Do Not Make Equity Partner

Inevitably, there remains a plethora of senior level associates who start to feel alienated and, unless the firm gives them effective feedback on the prospects of partnership, will most likely opt to quit the firm.

One method firms have been using to deal with this situation has been the institution of non-equity partnership tiers. In fact, over the years, many changes have occurred in the traditional partner-associate structure. Permanent associates, temporary attorneys, staff or contract lawyers, of counsel and non-equity partners (NEPs) have all been added to the mix.

Non-equity partnerships have long been utilized by large law firms, but the use of this alternative is on the rise. In fact, most large law firms have created some form of NEPs. Even smaller firms are following the trend. The popularity of this structure continues to grow to the extent that the number of non-equity partners in many firms is increasing more rapidly than the number of equity partners.

NEPs: Reasons for the Rise

There are at least five reasons more firms are creating an NEP tier:

1. to lengthen the equity partnership track in order to give younger lawyers more time to build their skills and their business;
2. to postpone on having to decide who deserves to make partner;
3. to avoid reducing profits per partner, particularly when profits are down;
4. to try to retain associates who may not, or will not, become equity partners and might otherwise leave the firm; and
5. to accommodate the many young lawyers today who don’t want to become equity partners because they don’t want to assume the responsibilities associated with partnership, and a non-equity partnership will provide this middle ground.

Types of NEPs

There are two types of NEPs: temporary and permanent.

Temporary status: In firms where NEP status is defined as “temporary,” or simply an additional step to full partnership, associates (or laterals) are elected NEPs for a designated period, usually not more than two to three years. The additional time before consideration for equity status enables them to gain more legal and client service experience, develop areas of expertise and develop more business. It also gives the firm more time to evaluate the lawyers.

Permanent status: In firms where the category is defined as “permanent,” NEPs will generally not then be considered for equity partnership — although there can be exceptions. In order to retain these lawyers, the firm designates them as “partners” to the public without defining their NEP status.

The Advantages of NEPs

NEP status has advantages for both lawyers and law firms. For one, while the lawyers are considered to be full partners to the public, they gain additional time to develop before facing the possibility of not being elected to full partnership. And lawyers who don’t wish to assume the financial obligations and time commitments required of equity partners can still become partners. From the firm’s perspective, the tier allows them to buy time and hold on to valuable lawyers without having to make them full equity partner.

Other Alternatives

Non-equity partnership is not the only alternative for a firm. Other options include creating a permanent category of “senior associate,” “senior lawyer,” or “special counsel”; or designating certain associates as “senior associates” and giving them substantial bonuses. This usually indicates the firm’s strong commitment to making these associates equity partners once they complete the normal partnership track. Of course, there is always the option to just let go of senior associates without allowing them to achieve partnership.

Conclusion

Just because the prospect of equity partnership is not as easy to come by or may take longer than in the past does not mean that you cannot have a long, stable career with a law firm. At the very least, you should know that there are other options available for lawyers at law firms besides straight equity partnership. Perhaps a non-equity partnership arrangement may even work out better for your career goals. If your current law firm is not in a position to offer you partnership, an attractive alternative to partnership or even go into discussions about your prospects for partnership, don’t be discouraged. There is no need to feel that there is no longer a place for you within the realm of a law firm. Perhaps it’s just time to go into discussions about joining another law firm.

Making a Lateral Cross-Country Move to San Francisco

I’m a litigator living in Boston and work at a large firm. I’m unhappy with my current firm environment, and I want to relocate to San Francisco since the market is picking up a bit and I wanted to practice in S.F. as soon as the market got a bit better. I have strong credentials, but have not passed the California Bar. I do have ties to the area since I was born there, have family there, and my girlfriend is working there as well. What are my chances to successfully make the lateral move to San Francisco?

Dear Ryan:

Thanks for taking the time to write to me: the short answer to your question is “it depends.” Obviously the answer to this question answer is a case-by-case basis, and you really haven’t provided enough data to allow me to provide clear guidance, so I would encourage you to talk to me or one of my colleagues in our San Francisco office so that we can advise you more fully.

First, let me correct a misperception about the litigation market in San Francisco–it is one of the few areas of the law that has been throttling along nicely. There have been fewer jobs in this practice area though because firms have made use of their less-busy corporate associates to handle excess work.

As your letter implies, making a successful lateral move depends on a number of things, some of them easily quantifiable, while others are not. The primary factors used by a firm will be the trifecta of (a) quality of your work experience at your current firm, (b) your academic credentials, and (c) whether a firm considers you to be a good cultural fit. The fact that you have ties to the Bay Area will assist your search, as you will be able to demonstrate your long-term commitment to the Bay Area, a factor which firms do consider. And, in our experience, it is rarely a factor that will queer a deal. In our experience, firms frequently overlook a lack of California bar experience, provided that the candidate has excellent other credentials and is barred in another state. I hope this helps, and we look forward to talking with you soon.