Don’t Believe the Hype About “Exclusive” Job Openings

Lately, we’ve been hearing from candidates that they are receiving cold-calls from recruiters claiming to have “exclusive” job listings that can only be applied for through that cold-calling recruiter. Of course, this is nothing new, and is indeed a favored strategy of cold-calling recruiters; but, I’ve recently seen candidates make costly mistakes as a result of such calls, including one instance where a candidate accepted an offer that ultimately is a very poor fit for her credentials and her stated long-term career interests.

The bottom line: when it comes to “exclusive” job listings, don’t believe the hype. Only in rare instances will firms enter into exclusive arrangements with a recruiter with respect to a job opening. Think about it – by doing so, a firm vastly limits its potential candidate pool. Of course, there are some instances where contractually binding exc lusive or retained search agreements make sense – for example, when a firm is looking to bring on board a new practice group or has had trouble finding qualified candidates for a position requiring a very specific or technical skill set. But these instances are rare indeed.

Here are some tips on how to handle the next cold call from a recruiter with a so-called “exclusive” job listing. First, ask them some key questions, such as: why is the law firm in question handling this particular search as an exclusive rather than opening it up to other recruiters?; how does the recruiter know that this is an exclusive search/i s there a contract between this recruiter and the firm stating that the recruiter is the only person entitled to fill this job opening?; and, why was the recruiter interested in taking on this exclusive search/what is it about this firm and this position that so appeals to the recruiter? If this is truly an exclusive, the  recruiter will easily be able to answer these questions (and, in fact, most good recruiters who are handling an exclusive listing will provide  answers to these questions before you even get a chance to ask them).

Also, don’t forget to use your common sense. If the cold-calling recruiter is overly-concerned about you disseminating information about this listing to your long-term recruiter, this should give you some pause. If it is really an exclusive the recruiter won’t be too concerned about this, since they should have a contractually binding agreement in place stating that they are the only recruiter who can submit candidates for the position. Lastly, as always, be leery of a recruiter who is ready to fire off your resume to a law firm after nothing more than a 5-minute conversation with you. That recruiter can’t possibly know enough about you or your career goals to be an effective advocate for you, or to help steer you towards opportunities that are best-suited to your expertise and interests.

Remember, the best way to ensure a successful job search is to adhere to a consistent approach. If you’re working with a recruiter you trust, stick with that person. If that person knows that you are putting your search in their hands, they will be fully committed to finding you the best fit for your interests (and will advise you accordingly, rather than trying to steer you towards an opening they have been incentivized to try to fill on behalf of a firm). Finally, keep in mind that you are better off sending your resume to as few recruiters as possible – this will help ensure the continued confidentiality of your search and can help protect against the unauthorized dissemination of your resume.

Choosing a Recruiter for Your Lateral Partner Search

BCG does quite a bit of work with partner candidates. The market continues to be strong for lateral partners nationwide.

Partner searches are different from associate searches, and it is important to find a recruiter who understands your objectives. I recently wrote an article on Choosing a Recruiter for Your Lateral Partner Search, highlighting important qualifications in a recruiter on partner searches. If you have a talented recruiter on your side, then your search will be much more pleasant and (hopefully) successful.

Unemployed? STAY BUSY.

A year ago, if someone had told me that the vast majority of associate-level candidates I would see during 2009 were going to be unemployed, I would have laughed (or cried). But it’s true. Unemployment is a reality for associates in all areas of law and at all levels. Lately, I have seen these associates fall into two categories: those who believe that staying busy in their substantive area of law will benefit their marketability to firms, and those who think now is the time to become one with the couch and rekindle their love affair with soap operas.

To most of you, I hope this is an obvious statement: the attorneys in the first category are going to get jobs long before those in the latter category. It feels almost ridiculous to have to say something that obvious. But I have my reasons. For example, I recently spoke to a candidate who called me about a new job posting on the BCG Attorney Search website. He has absolutely fantastic academic credentials and law firm experience, but in 2006 he left his last firm to obtain an additional graduate degree, and while doing so the market crashed. Consequently, he has been out of the law firm world for almost three years (two while in school and a year since graduation). Naturally, one of the first questions I asked him was to explain what he had been doing since earning his graduate degree a year ago. Imagine my surprise when he replied “not much.” I followed that up with “Have you been keeping up with the ever-changing rules and regulations of your practice area?” “Ah, not really,” he mumbled. “What about attending CLE classes?” I asked. “Um, that’s a good idea. Hadn’t thought about that.” (Really? Is that possible?) “Volunteering or doing contract work?” His reply: “nope.” You get my point. The guy had been doing nothing to help explain the growing gap on his resume (other than search the web for a permanent job).

As a recruiter, this makes my job infinitely more difficult. The first question a firm is going to ask me when I submit this candidate’s resume is to explain what he has been doing for the last year. Make no mistake, the majority of firms I work with are not turned off by a candidate who has been laid off from his firm, but they do want to know that the candidate is motivated to keep up with his legal knowledge and skills. Think about it. If you were the hiring partner at a firm, wouldn’t you prefer to interview the candidate who has been taking CLE classes, volunteering at a legal aid clinic, seeking out contract work where available and networking with former colleagues and friends all while contemporaneously looking for a permanent job over the candidate that has just been looking for work for the last year? Firms are not stupid. They know that while a job search is very time consuming, it does leave time for other activities. And in this economy, no matter your credentials, if you are not out there doing extracurricular activities, the guy sitting next to you (who has equally impressive credentials) is– and he is going to get the job over you.

So, get out there. I guarantee that it will help you land a solid job.

Consider both the specific legal market and the cost of living when making a geographic move

Many of you probably read the title of this post, rolled your eyes into the back of your head and thought “wow, this woman is a real genius.  Who woulda thought cost of living mattered?”

Yes, I get it.  Everything thinks about cost of living when they contemplate a geographic move, but apparently not everyone believes that it will apply to them or thinks that each specific legal market differs in terms of compensation.  For example, I recently worked with a delightful corporate associate who wanted to move from the East Coast to Milwaukee, Wisconsin.  He had about two years of solid, sophisticated corporate experience from a firm that paid him a base salary of $170K a year.  When we began the search for a new job in Milwaukee, I explained to him that firms pay much less there than they do in Washington, D.C., partly because of the difference in cost of living, but also because the market simply supports lower salaries.   I even went so far as to say that the major firms in the area start their first year associates at $110K to $115K.  My candidate responded to this by saying that he understood this and was prepared for a significant decrease in compensation.  However, when an offered rolled in at $119K, this candidate was less than impressed.

Let’s just say that I was confused, to say the least.  After all, I had warned him of the market and the cost of living change, and he claimed to be prepared.  When I asked him for an explanation, he said that he had gone to a website that calculates the difference in cost of living between specific cities, and according to that calculator, my candidate’s $170K salary on the East Coast should translate to $125K or more in Milwaukee.

Now, I am a big proponent of due diligence, and I have no problem with the various cost of living calculators out there on the internet (although none of the websites that I have visited provide even remotely similar calculations to one another), but a generic cost of living calculator is not going to take into account the specific legal market and what types of salaries it supports.

My candidate was right– according to a number of cost of living calculators in the internet, someone making $170K in Washington, D.C. should make around $125K in Milwaukee.  But for the most part, Milwaukee law firms do not care what the equivalent salaries are in various cities.  They care about their competition in the market and what the other firms are paying their attorneys.  For whatever reason, the large firms in Milwaukee generally pay a little less than their equivalents in Washington, D.C., and it is a candidate’s job to understand this before undertaking a job search.

Frustrating as it might be, a law firm is not going to pay an associate more than it pays everyone else because s/he is coming from a market that pays more, even after adjusting for cost of living, so if you want to move to a city in which this is the case, you must be prepared.  If not, you are bound to be disappointed at whatever offer(s) you receive.

I bet that most of you reading this think you know how things turned out for my candidate in Washington, D.C.  Sadly, most of you are wrong.  Even after I explained the differences in the legal markets, my candidate still felt under-compensated at $119K, and he ultimately turned down the offer, admitting that Milwaukee might not be the best place for him after all.   And you know what?  I think he is right.

Make no mistake, I do not fault this candidate for turning the offer down based on a salary that was $6K less than he thought he deserved, and it is not my place to judge him for doing so.  In fact, I give him a lot of credit for recognizing that he would be unhappy at a lower salary, even if everything else about the job and firm was perfect for him.  Having said that, I can guarantee that I am not going to allow this to happen in the future, even if it requires me to drill into my candidates’ heads that cost of living is not the only thing to consider when moving geographic locations.  Each market is different and pays its associates what the market will support, and every candidate that contemplates a move needs to know this from the start.

Writing good quality articles and publishing them can work wonders for your firm’s marketability (and your own marketability as a partner or associate)

Adam Stock and Adrian Dayton recently published this article for the National Law Journal entitled, “Write, Share, Get Noticed.” Their article makes the point that it’s easier than ever to garner widespread dissemination of your work due to the internet and social media, but make the point that quality also really counts.  They encourage associates and firm marketers to write extensively on their practice areas, but to make sure that the content is excellent.  Below are the salient points they make in the article:

1. Publish online content regularly. Content is the key to visibility online.
2. Publish good, helpful content. The more people like it, the more they will share it and the more visibility you will get. Be smart, but be accessible.
3. Write about what you know. No matter how specialized you are, there is an audience that you can now reach through the “magic” of the Internet.

Here is the article:

http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/PubArticleTX.jsp?id=1202534594631