Archive for December, 2010

Location, Relocation, Location

I was reviewing the cover letter a candidate had sent to a number of firms, prior to coming to BCG for assistance. In it, she makes her ties to the city clear, as well as her strong desire to relocate to the area specifically. As you probably know, when applying for a job, a connection to the area is typically going to be very helpful, if not necessary. However, you should be careful relaying this information to potential employers.

In the letter, the candidate was passionate about her desire to relocate to their city and her list of reasons long. Therefore, when she asked if she could go back to the firm and express an interest in another office, I told her it would probably lead them to question her credibility. Expressing an interest in a specific office is by no means an automatic deal breaker for other opportunities, but you should put some serious thought into how you present your desires to the firms.

Keep in mind that this is where the value of a seasoned recruiter comes into play. We know where the firms stand on these things and and guide you on your approach.

Why Most Attorneys Never Realize Their Full Potential

Efforts in courage are not enough without purpose and direction.
John F. Kennedy

In reviewing the careers of countless attorneys, I believe I have come to understand what makes the majority of attorneys succeed and the majority of attorneys fail.  I reach this conclusion from having examined the careers of hundreds of attorneys at both the partner and associate level.  After nearly a decade of meeting enormously successful attorneys, average attorney and below average attorneys, I believe I have the answer.

I remember during my second year of practice as an attorney standing in my office when two fellow attorneys in my law firm walked in.  These attorneys were both my same class year and were nice guys.  Incredibly, when these two guys walked in my office I had just gotten off the telephone with a legal recruiter who informed me that I had just received an offer from a competing firm where my salary would nearly double.  This was before the days of the “salary wars” and major and important firms in the same city often had vastly different salaries.  In this case I had received an offer from a firm that was the highest paying firm by far in Los Angeles-this was what now seems like a long time ago.

G-d works in strange ways and in this instance the two guys almost immediately started talking about our current firm and how if the attorneys in our class remained at our firm they would all make partner.  Both of these guys then said that their objective was to remain at this law firm and make partner.  Out of the 15 people or so who were in my starting class at this law firm, these were the only two who stayed at the Firm and both are partners there to this day.  I remember when I found out that each one had made partner thinking to myself “of course they did.”  I am also confident that each of these guys will have solid careers at this firm and if I had to bet I would say that each of these guys will remain at this firm throughout their careers.

I believe I am attracted to legal recruiting in large part because I love watching what makes certain people succeed.  The people I have worked with I believe benefit enormously from my study of success and failure.  The difference that makes some attorneys have profound success in the law and makes other wallow is the difference between being strategic and being tactical with their careers

A. The Tactical Attorney

When I sit in my office and interview attorneys I often feel like I am in an alternate universe.  It is common for attorneys to go to top 10 law schools and have a succession of 4-5 jobs with major law firms in less than 7 to 8 years.  In each instance where the attorney leaves one firm and goes to another you have to wonder.  “Did this person think something was going to be different at the next firm?”  You really have to wonder why they are moving around so much.

Consider the attorney who is moving from firm to firm like this.  Chances are this attorney sits down at the new firm and does the same (or similar) sorts of work they did at the previous law firm.  The attorney will likely have the same sorts of relationships at the second firm with their colleagues that they had at the first firm.  The attorney will also likely encounter similar issues with the people giving them work at the previous firm.  The attorney will probably also dislike the same things about the fourth firm that they disliked about the third firm.

Even if an attorney is not switching firms, they may constantly be “on the defensive” with their career at their current firm-never feeling they are doing good enough, hoping someone gives them work, hoping someone leaves to make an opportunity for them-and so on.

I have a lot of concern about the way that most companies do business in America today and the way most executives approach their careers.  Many companies do things simply for short term gain.  Many executives are hoping that their companies will award them stock options so they can “cash out” and retire or do something else.  There is a lot of emphasis on short term value and not long term value in the way most people do business.  This short term emphasis is very tactical-and this tactical emphasis in a career is insane.

If you find an employer that is fair and reasonable, you could end up being there for 10, 20, 30 or more years.  This sort of long term connection between and employer and an employee is meaningful.  The employee will typically feel a great deal of security in their position, the employer will be comfortable with the employee at all times, the employee will be around people that understand them and appreciate them for who they are.

Until the mid-1980s in most companies in America (not to mention law firms) most employees remained with a company throughout their career.  This was also a time when America was considered very strong in the manufacturing industry on the world stage (much more so than today).  With the threat of massive competition coming from Japan in the middle of the 1980s, companies started becoming less loyal to employees and terminating people more readily and employees started leaving more readily as well.  A bond between employees and employers was broken in a quick time that had existed for a long, long time.  While I am not idealizing this time by no means, for the most part an employee would only be discharged by a larger company for gross, gross incompetence or extreme dishonesty.

When I use the term “tactic” I am referring to any method used to get short-term gain that is immediate.  If someone needs money, a tactic would be to rob a bank, for example.  If  someone does not like how their work is perceived at their employer, a tactic would be to immediately switch jobs in order to feel better.  Most attorneys I know of are tactical.

The tactical attorney looks to what result they are getting in the “here and now” for their efforts.  For example, if their firm is not paying “quite market” they may investigate other opportunities.  If they are not getting the work they want at the moment they may also leave the firm they are at.

Let me tell you a couple of stories about attorneys I know who were quite tactical with their careers.

One brilliant attorney I know of graduated near the top of his class in a top 10 law school.  He did some important work outside of a law firm for a few year and then joined a law firm in his third year of practice.  When he joined the firm he told them that he did not want to do anything other than intellectual collar litigation.  The firm he joined was one of the top firms in the United States.  When the attorney joined the firm the firm did not have any intellectual property litigation cases and so they put him on another type of case.  He refused the work on the grounds that he was hired to do intellectual property litigation and that was all he intended to do.  After four or five attempts to assign this attorney work the firm gave up.  Six months later he had not billed any hours and was fired for not billing any work.  With this on his record and horrific references from his prior firm, this attorney was never able to get a job with a law firm of more than a few attorneys again.

A couple of years ago I was with a recruiter from our company who met an attorney for a meal.  The attorney had recently been placed at a firm and said that he did not like the firm because they had changed the floor he had to park on in the Firm’s building.  The attorney was looking for a job.

Most attorneys are tactical and are focused on what they can get in the here and now.  This focus is extremely limiting because they do not have a long-term view of where they are going.  Looking at the small things in relationship to their employers is something that holds them back tremendously.

Think about the things you may do in your career that are tactical.  In my case, I might still be practicing law if I had not been tactical long ago looking at a competing salary as so important, for example, when I knew in my heart that remaining where I was at could have given me a long-term result that was fantastic.

B. The Strategic Attorney

Strategic attorneys typically are the most successful attorneys.  When an attorney is strategic they have a well defined and detailed plan to achieve a long-term goal.  They use tactics as a means of carrying out their strategy.

Think back above to the two attorneys in my firm who knew they wanted to be partners in the firm they were in way back when.  Compensation issues were not really meaningful for them.  In addition, I am sure they never were too concerned about parking.  These guys simply knew where they were going and knew they were going to get there.

Most people do not have written long-term goals.  I highly recommend having long-term goals and, in fact, believe they are the most important thing you can have.  If you have not seen the movie or read the book The Secret I highly recommend doing so as both this book and movie go into considerable detail about the power of goal setting.  Whether it is Napolean Hill’s classic Think and Grow Rich, a Tony Robbins seminar-most self improvement programs you will encounter will push you aggressively to set goals for yourself and know where you are going.  Once you decide where you are going your subconscious and conscious mind will figure out a way to get you there.  The decisions you make in response to your goal setting will literally shape your destiny.

1. A strategic attorney knows their result

A strategic attorneys knows where they are going.  The strategic attorney’s goal may be to be a partner in their law firm (or another firm).  The strategic attorney may be interested in being a famous attorney.  The strategic attorney may be interested in being the attorney with the most business of any attorney in their city.  The strategic attorney may want to be President of the United States (as Bill Clinton did even when he was in law school).  Regardless of the strategic attorney’s goal, he will have a goal.  This goal for the attorney is important.

2. The strategic attorney has a purpose for desiring the result

Just wanting something is never enough.  You must also have a purpose for wanting what you want.  You need to have reasons for doing what you want to do.  These reasons are something that will motivate you and give you a purpose for wanting to achieve.  You need to ask yourself “why” you want to be something you seeking to be or do whatever you are seeking to do.

Every attorney should commit goals to paper and write them down for 1 year, 3 years, 5 years, 10 years and 20 years.  If you do not have long term strategic objectives your career will be like a ship without a rudder.

As I mentioned earlier in this article, my decision to leave the firm I left sounds like it might have been “tactical” but in reality it was not.  Long, long ago my grandfather had been friends at the University of Michigan with the founder of the second firm I worked at (the Founder of this firm had once ran for President and my grandfather was proud of having been friends in college with someone who went on to be a presidential candidate).  When I was younger I wanted to be an attorney and my grandfather told me “if you want to be an attorney you should go to work for Thomas Dewey’s firm.”  I set a goal for myself to work in that firm when I was only 18 years old.  My grandfather died a year later.  When I was in law school I did not get an on campus interview with the firm.   When I began practicing I only applied to one firm because I had set a goal for myself to work there a long time ago.  I imagine I made a lot of decisions based on this strategy I had for myself.

Conclusion
The setting of a goal (long-term strategy) is often equivalent to its attainment.  But if you do not start somewhere you’ll ultimately be nowhere.  The strategic attorney is the most successful sort of attorney.  If you are strategic your career and life will change.

The BCG Attorney Search Difference

Most attorneys do not give sufficient thought to planning their legal careers. Sure, when they graduate from law school, they seek out the best jobs they can get. They practice for a couple of years, then at some point probably decide to seek new jobs. Yet sometimes even after working for a few years, and possibly even after multiple job changes, these attorneys still don’t know where they really want to be in their legal careers. If they do know, then they don’t know how to actually get there. Because of this, countless attorneys continue to follow unfulfilling career paths, and as a result many end up leaving the practice of law completely. Many of these attorneys could have built successful and rewarding legal careers, had they only been more aware of how to plan such a career.

Legal recruiters often are valuable assets to attorneys who are trying to find fulfilling career paths. Good legal recruiters are experts in the legal market. Their clients rely on them for advice on every issue that might affect their careers. Furthermore, their clients count on them to locate not just any jobs, but jobs that are perfect fits for each client’s own individual career goals.

Good legal recruiters do not merely know about the general legal market; rather, they forge close relationships with both law firms and candidates. They must grasp what each firm is looking for in potential hires, and must know about everything from firm culture to specialized practice groups. Additionally, they must identify what each candidate really is looking for in his or her career, and must know enough details about each candidate to (a) discern which employer would be the best fit for that candidate, and (b) successfully present the candidate to that particular firm. In short, good legal recruiters need to know where their clients truly want to go their legal careers, and how they can get there.

BCG Attorney Search is most successful legal-recruiting firm in the United States. The company has gotten jobs for thousands of attorneys, and the depth of its resources is unrivaled in the industry. BCG’s recruiters are first-rate attorneys who have practiced with major American law firms. Additionally, BCG works only on placing attorneys in law firms, and has developed unmatched expertise regarding the unique needs of attorneys.

Should You Switch Practice Areas

In a lot of respects, the path attorneys take to joining a particular practice area is nothing short of insane.  Most attorneys interview for summer associate jobs, take the best summer job they can get, and join a particular firm without much thought to what practice area they will be in.  Given that people spend a significant amount of their lifetime at work, enjoying the work they do is especially vital, and the process attorneys undertake to choose a practice area seems nonsensical in a lot of respects.  It not surprising then that many attorneys call virtually all of our offices on a daily basis seeking to switch practice areas.

It is difficult to switch practice areas, but it can be done.  Your ability to switch practice areas will depend upon your academic background, the length of time you have practiced, the law firm you are with, the condition of the legal job market, the market demand of the practice area you want to leave and enter, your geographic location and, perhaps, pure luck.  However, the most important aspect involving the switching of practice areas revolves around the question of who you are specifically.

An important aspect to remember in all of this discussion is that switching practice areas should not be a decision taken lightly.  What type of work you should be practicing should be more a function of where you feel your skill set and interest lie more than anything.  Additionally, simply switching firms to join a new practice area may not always be appropriate either.  For example, you may be able to switch practice areas within the confines of your own firm.  If this is possible, you should not enlist the aid of a recruiter.

How Do Attorneys Choose Practice Areas?

Many attorneys initially choose one practice area over another by default: simply, it is the best job they get after some search during law school.  Sometimes, the condition of the legal market forces them to choose a particular practice area.  For example, because of the weak market condition in the early 1990’s, most law students were forced to choose litigation instead of corporate or transactional areas of the law.  Others decide based on their perceived stability of their chosen practice area and the strong demand shown in the marketplace for attorneys in a practice area.

For those law students who did very well in law school, how they select their chosen practice area may be different.  Prior to the bar results being announced, most of these recent graduates would have chosen their area of practice.  Most would have expressed a desire to enter a particular area during or after their second-year summer clerkship, and would pursue those firms that would allow them to practice in their chosen area.  In addition, compensation or the chance to later obtain an in-house position may be the driving force in choosing a practice area.  Yet others admire someone practicing certain type of law, and think it is glamorous and prestigious, and decide to follow that person’s footsteps in choosing a practice area.

In whatever manner a recent graduate chooses a particular area of practice, once that lawyer begins practicing law, partners, other associates, clients and people in general begin building expectations and, in their mind, categorize the lawyer as a litigation, corporate or patent expert.

Unfortunately, these expectations become even more intense as the years pass, and, obviously, make it all the more difficult to switch practice areas.  If you have been a real estate transactional attorney for 8 years with no litigation experience, despite the fact that you went to Harvard and did very well there, you would find it difficult to land a job in a major law firm doing securities litigation.

A colossal change in practice area, as described above, would be possible if there is a tremendous demand for lawyers in the desired practice area and/or the lawyer has solid credentials.  For example, assuming the lawyer described above has a technical degree, firms may be interested in him if he chooses to become a patent attorney.  Of course, in most cases, he would have to take a cut in his salary and may be required to adjust his partnership track position within the firm.

Who Wants to Switch?

1. Litigators. Litigators are the most likely candidates to want to switch to another practice area.  In most instances, litigators want to switch practice areas to become corporate attorneys.  In the 2000 calendar year, we had more litigators calling us who wanted to switch to corporate than we had litigators calling us to switch firms within the litigation field. We have little doubt that many of these attorneys were drawn to the corporate field by the idea that if they practiced corporate law they would have the opportunity to work in an Internet company and retire at the age of thirty with healthy stock options.  While this happened probably only 1 in 1000 times for attorneys who went to work for Internet companies, the fact is that it did happen to some attorneys.  We have all heard the stories about the successes and excesses, and they are all good stories.  Early retirement, however, should not be a prime motivation for switching practice areas.

Some litigators, moreover, are initially mesmerized by courtroom drama, or perhaps by the personalities of famous trial lawyers such as David Boies, F. Lee Bailey, Jerry Spence, or Johnny Cochran.  However, after practicing for some period of time, they become frustrated with having to review stacks of documents or engaging in petty procedural law & motion matters, and quickly realize that they would rather build than destroy.  Many attorneys who switch from corporate to litigation also do so because they do not like the constant conflict and adversarial environment involved in a litigation practice

Similarly, many law students may have misunderstood what makes good litigators when they made the decision to join a particular practice group.  Litigators are not necessarily the Type A personality, who lacks social graces, are innately aggressive, and exhibit no empathy to their adversaries.  Most successful litigators are, instead, cordial and professional in their interaction with their counterparts, and are great writers and strategists who can think quickly on their feet.  Arguably, Daniel Goleman, the author of Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ, was right that successful people, for our purpose litigators, possess self-awareness, altruism, personal motivation, empathy, and the ability to understand and relate to the emotions of others and are able to overlook and ignore adversaries who exhibit gigantic egos, are unprofessional or act rudely. According to Goleman:

“At best IQ contributes about 20% to the factors that determine life success, which leaves 80% to other forces…No one can yet say exactly how much of the variability from person to person in life’s course it accounts for. But what data exist suggest it can be as powerful, and at times more powerful, than IQ.”  (Goleman, Daniel (1995). Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. New York: Bantam Books.  )

If you have the qualities of successful people described by Goleman, you probably have the building blocks of being a talented litigator.

2. Corporate Attorneys. The desire to switch practice area is not unique to litigators.  Corporate and transactional lawyers realize that they are not “doing deals” as often as they would like, or realize that they spend too much time with volumes of legal jargon and not enough time schoomzing with dealmakers.  As legal recruiters, the pattern of calls we receive is quite amusing.  For example, during the first half of the Year 2001, as corporate attorneys were being laid off or corporate work was very slow in numerous large American law firms, we started getting calls from corporate attorneys wanting to switch to litigation.  In the Year 2000, when the corporate market was doing exceptionally well, we did not receive any calls from corporate attorneys wanting to switch to litigation.  One thing about litigation is that there are people who are more suited to it than corporate work.  Litigators tend to have very good verbal and writing abilities  and enjoy the human sides of conflict.  Conversely, corporate attorneys tend to enjoy the unemotional but controllable aspects of the work they do and the exposure to high profile deals.  Corporate attorneys often have an interest in business as well.

In the wake of the tremendous demand for young corporate attorneys from 1998 through the Year 2000, many attorneys may have gone into the corporate field who were actually more suited to litigation.  Accordingly, there may be justifications now for many of the attorneys who initially chose corporate as a practice group to switch to litigation.

Why do you want to switch?

Attorneys who chose to switch practice areas for the “right reasons” most often do so because they realize they are not suited for the particular practice area they are in.  It is imperative that you thoroughly evaluate the reasons why you want to switch practice areas.  Why do you want to switch?  Was it listening to your friends boast about the mega merger deals they worked on, or the salary they command because of the incredible demand for lawyers in their practice area?  Or, was it your perceived glamour of courtroom drama, or watching countless hours of Ally McBeal?

Have you though about whether you are seeking to change practice area because you are unhappy with your current firm?  In such circumstances, changing firms may ultimately be the right choice instead.  Perhaps you need a vacation after working for 30 days straight in closing a huge deal.

Whatever the reason, you need to be honest with yourself and identify the reason you are seeking change in your practice area, and make sure that your reason are thoroughly explored and are compelling.  You do not want to find yourself in the similar predicament in a year or two after you have switched practice areas.

Critical Analysis

You have to critically analyze yourself to determine if you have the personality traits and qualities to practice in the area you desire.  If you are an introvert, who does not enjoy a confrontational and adversarial work environment, you should not consider switching your practice area to become a litigator.  Are you detailed oriented?  Do you enjoy working mostly on your own, or with others?  Do you have an inquisitive nature?  Are you good with numbers?  Do you enjoy complex matters?  Do relish winning, rather than seeking a win-win resolution?

Besides analyzing your personality traits, you must also take stock of your credentials, both of your academic and experience background.  Remember that firms are pedigree hounds!  Having an impressive academic background opens a lot of doors, including getting a firm to notice you even if you want to switch practice areas.  Another attribute is major law firm experience.  A Latham & Watkins corporate associate or a Kirkland & Ellis litigation associate would get much more favorable reception than one who toiled for an unknown firm in North Dakota (this is not to say North Dakota does not have great firms).

How To Make The Change?

Once you have identified the reasons you are seeking to change your practice area and are convinced that the reasons are compelling, and have done the requisite critical self analysis as well as of your academic and experience credentials, you should plan how to proceed to make the desired change.

If you have been a solid associate, and your firm thinks highly of you, then you should approach your current firm and ask to switch your practice area.  You should first speak with trusted confidants within the firm, hopefully partners or senior associates, before surprising the managing partner or the head of the practice group.  In addition, find out if there is a need for an associate in the desired practice area within the firm.  If there is such a need, naturally your task is much easier.

Also, you should explore whether changing your firm would enable you to reach your desired goal.  If you have superior credentials, have serious commitment to changing your practice area, and there is a demand in the marketplace for such lawyers, you will probably be successful in changing your practice area.  In making the preparation for switching your practice area, think about attending a seminar or taking a class to familiarize yourself with your desired practice area.  This would show the firms initiative on your part, and it would demonstrate to the firms that you are serious and committed, and have thoroughly explored the practice area you want to enter.

Conclusion

It is true that people’s emotional well-being is strongly tied to their work.  This is not surprising because a significant portion of our waking hours is spent going to work, actually working or thinking about our work.  If one is unhappy with his line of work, a feeling of discontentment, melancholy and sadness, including perhaps depression, most likely permeates in his social and professional life.

Of course, it is entirely normal to feel unhappy with your job occasionally, and the reasons for the unhappiness may not be related to your practice area.  But if it is connected to your practice area, it behooves you to explore the reasons.  Besides determining why you want to switch your practice area, you should critically analyze your skill sets and personality traits, as well as academic and professional credentials, prior to embarking on the process to change your practice area.

Big Changes on The Legal Scene: Layoffs and Outsourcing

Incisive Media, the owner of American Lawyer Magazine and Law.com announced more layoffs last week. This comes after the layoffs announced in April of this year (see the American Lawyer layoff memo below from ALM CEO Bill Pollak below).

Folks,Several weeks ago, I wrote to you about our business results for the first quarter of 2008 and shared some of the challenges we face as a result of the credit squeeze and other market factors. I also described our intention to tighten our belts and reduce costs. With no change in sight on the economic horizon, the senior management team and I have spent the past few weeks examining our business options. Our goal was to find solutions that would lower expenses without compromising quality, and which would allow us to continue to invest in and meet our long term business goals. In particular, we all strongly agree on the need to continue investing in our Web infrastructure, while expanding ALM’s ability to generate and publish content online.

We looked at each business with these questions in mind: Are we getting the right return on our investment? Do we need to keep doing this work? Can we do this work another way? We believe that while we are primarily doing the right work in the right way, there are changes we need to make immediately to respond to economic conditions.

Some of these changes involve revising the timing or scope of planned initiatives. Others, however, are staff related and go beyond simply delaying the filling of open jobs. In total, we have decided to eliminate forty-two current positions across ALM and Incisive’s US operations. These staff reductions are distributed across businesses, locations and job levels and all the employees involved have already been notified.

The business changes we will be making are also broad in scope. These include scaling back plans to grow Real Estate Media’s Florida publication intoa monthly magazine; closing down the Operations Department of Incisive’s Norwalk, CT office; and shifting Law Firm, Inc. from a print magazine to a digital product.

Another change in business strategy — and the one that will have the greatest impact on staff — is our decision to restructure ALM’s Event Division and reassign management responsibility for many of our existing SRI conferences to Insight in Canada, Incisive’s Events group in London and ALM’s Legal Publishing Division. A number of SRI’s financial events will be eliminated.

Accepting and working through change is never easy, and changes that affect our colleagues and friends can be particularly painful. We did not make these decisions lightly. But we know that our future success depends on our ability to align ourselves with our markets and clients, and to ensure we have the resources we need to develop and grow our brands. The changes announced today will not only help us during the current economic turbulence, but will make us stronger in the future.

As always, if you have any questions, feel free to drop me a note at
[Redacted].

Bill

This memo concerns me because ALM does not appear to see a brightening horizon coming to the legal field anytime soon. This is very dire news indeed.

A report I read in the Wall Street Journal this week really concerned me as well. This report started that up to 35,000 legal jobs will have moved offshore by 2010–and 79,000 will be offshore by 2015. We are talking about people writing legal briefs and doing patents in India. This is pretty scary stuff to a lot of lawyers.

What this means, essentially, is that a lot of the work American attorneys are doing at the moment is moving overseas. A lot of the work junior attorneys do at the moment can easily be done by people in other countries making a lot less money.