When is the Best Time to Make a Move

At least once during their careers, most attorneys think that they would be better off at another firm. This article will analyze (1) whether you should make a move and, if so, (2) when you should make a move to another firm.

WHETHER YOU SHOULD MAKE A MOVE.

Associates may be interested in a move for a number of reasons. You may want to leave your firm because of one or a combination of reasons. Often these reasons cluster into four major categories: Quality of Work, Professional Growth, Firm Culture, and Personal Choices. While these categories may overlap or you may perceive them differently, see whether any one point or some combination of the following points sound familiar. If so, you may find that the time is right to make a move.

Quality of work

Let’s face it. You’ve worked hard, thought deeply about the law, and now find yourself in a firm wondering “All that to review documents? To prepare yet another memo?” This issue may make you laugh, but then again, it could make you cry. After all, the first years at a firm color how your career may go and the type of attorney you want to be. The quality of the work you do, drives your ability to move up at the firm or elsewhere. So you should evaluate the firm to see whether it is where you want it to be. Classic problems in this area include:

1. You find the work at your firm to be unsophisticated or not diverse enough.
2. You would like to move to a firm where you have more “hands on” experience.
3. You are not getting enough work because there is a slowdown in your area.

Professional Growth

Similar to quality of work, professional growth matters. The difference here is that you must push to obtain the feedback and mentorship necessary for any professional to succeed. In some cases, that feedback will be through the formal system the firm has in place. In others, you may have a partner who takes the time to guide you through the complexities of the firm’s culture, crazy clients, and simply coping with the realities of being a firm lawyer. In addition, when reflecting on this aspect of your career, you should examine whether you are developing the skills required to make partner. As such, consider whether:

1. You do not have senior associates or partners giving you proper feedback on your work product.
2. You do not have a mentor who takes a vested interest in your career.
3. You want more client contact.
4. The partner prospects at your firm are limited.

Firm Culture

This one is easy. You spend time-too much time perhaps-at your firm. Unlike high school, college, or law school, at a firm you cannot choose the people with whom you associate. And despite your charming personality and dedication, you may not click with key people at the firm. Maybe you’ve discovered that firm hours or the belief that a Blackberry really should be waterproof so you can take it in the shower just doesn’t match up with how you view the world. Whatever the reason, you probably spend close to 50% of your life there; it should be a place you like. Signs of culture clash often include:

1. There is a personality conflict with a partner at the firm/practice group.
2. Your last formal review was not glowing but you are not sure why.
3. You want a firm that has more focus on diversity.
4. You want to decrease your billable hours.
5. You simply don’t like the firm’s philosophy regarding associates and maybe the world.

Personal Choices

On top of all these other concerns, you may have personal reasons to leave a firm. Pay, location, and career shifts could easily fuel a desire to leave your current firm, even if it’s not such a bad place. In other words, where you are may not float your boat, and you may find:

1. You are looking for an increase in your overall compensation.
2. You want to move to another city.
3. You want to change practice areas.
4. You are at a satellite office and wish to move to a local/regional firm.
5. You just feel that things aren’t working out.

Add It Up

Quality of work, professional growth, firm culture, and personal choices-all of these areas hold great importance in your career and life path. And you could easily find that many of the issues above resonate with you. BUT, does that mean you should be looking out the door? It might, but it might not. Many of the above are subjective questions best answered by your own perspective.

Nonetheless, remember there are (or should be) some objective resources available to you. Hopefully, your firm has a review process. Think back to your last review and dissect what it seemed to say. That should guide you. But what if your last review was some time ago or your firm does not have a review process?

You can generate your own review as long as you are careful about how you do it. Be sure to approach the investigation in a positive: “I love the firm and want to be sure I am doing all I can to understand and improve my place within it manner.” Not: “This place is lame. What am I doing with my life? Now I know why lawyer jokes are so popular.”

Here’s the two-step: If you have a mentor in whom you can confide, definitely approach that person and ask him/her what other attorneys think of your work product, your progress at the firm, and if he/she thinks you are a long-term player. If you do not have a mentor, ask for more feedback on your work product from a senior associate or partner. This way you will at least be able to evaluate if people like your work and think you are doing a good job.

If there are negative comments or you do not get any feedback, you are probably right on the mark that things are not working out, and it may be time to make a move. Still, remember to take that information constructively. Do not grump about the office. Instead, see whether the comments are true and how they reflect on your overall assessment of your career.

If after all that analysis, you find you want to jump start your career at another firm, there is one more question to ask:

WHEN IS THE BEST TIME TO MAKE A MOVE?

In general, the best time for associates to move from one firm to another is after completion of their second year and before completion of their sixth year of practice. After your second year of practice you have a good amount of experience in your practice area and have learned the basics of being an attorney at a law firm. Firms hire lateral associates when they have work that needs to be done, the associates who are currently at the firm are swamped, and/or they do not have anyone else with that particular expertise at their firm.

Think about it from a firm’s point of view. Firms want to hire associates who can hit the ground running and immediately do the work. After your second year, you should have a skill set that is in high demand and allows firms to worry less about training you and more about feeding you work. Plus, this ratio improves through the years. Now, you might ask, if that is true, why is it difficult to get hired after completion of the sixth year of practice?

At this stage in your career, you are getting very close to partnership consideration. So, firms are concerned about the message hiring a lateral senior associate sends to associates who have been with the firm since their first year and are now in their fifth, sixth, or seventh years of practice. Most senior associates at the firm will think either they are being replaced and will not have an opportunity for partnership or there is now more competition for a partnership position. Although these concerns may not be valid, someone’s perception may determine whether they should start looking for partnership opportunities at another firm. Obviously, firms do not want to send a mixed message to their top-performing senior associates.

The two-to-six-year rule, however, is just a general one and does not cover all situations. You may have a unique practice area, and regardless of how many years of experience, firms will want to hire you. Also, if a firm is desperate for an attorney with any experience in a practice area or if the associate has stellar academic credentials, a firm may hire an associate with less than two years of experience.

What if you are of counsel or a partner at your current firm and you do not have a book of business? Unless you have a niche practice or a firm is willing to take a hit on profitability to expand a practice area, it is unlikely you are going to be able to make a transition to another firm. The harsh reality is that firms are businesses and they look at their bottom lines as far as revenue and expenses are concerned. If you are a partner or of counsel, you are going to demand a high salary and there is going to be substantial overhead for the firm. For example, if you are a partner with 15 years of experience, your salary is $250,000. Depending on the firm and the location of the office, the expense per partner is anywhere between $100,000 to $200,000. So, on the low end, the new firm would have an expense of $350,000 if they hired an of counsel or partner-level candidate without business. For the firm, the hire has to make financial sense, and it will be difficult for the partners to agree on such an expense. A track record of business will be taken into account, but most firms in this economy are more interested in what business you can transport with you today compared to what you could generate three years ago.

HOW LONG SINCE YOUR LAST MOVE?

When thinking about a move to another firm, you should always consider how many moves you have already made. If you have moved three times in five years, it will be difficult for you to move again. Firms do not like associates who move around often. They believe that you will be there for a year or two and then leave their firm as well. It costs more than $200,000 to replace an associate, so they look at you as an investment and do not like turnover. Now, if you moved cities three times because of very good reasons, you may have a better chance. In general, however, you shouldn’t move more than three times within a six-year period.

It is also important to take into account how long it’s been since your last move. If you just get to a firm and realize within the first month or two that it’s not for you, you should leave right away. A firm will understand if you made a mistake or if things were promised from the firm that were not occurring. However, after the two-month time period, you should try to stay at your firm for at least 18 months. This will allow you the time to try to make things work at your firm. If things don’t work out, at least when you are interviewing, you can explain that you tried everything in your power to make it work and, unfortunately, it is not a place where you can stay for the rest of your career. Again, firms do not hire “firm hoppers.”

WHAT IS THE BEST TIME OF YEAR TO MOVE?

In general, between January and June is the season for moving between firms. A few facts intersect to create this situation. First, firms usually put a strategic plan in place in December for the coming year. They have a budget allocated to hiring new associates which becomes effective January 1st. Second, associates start receiving their bonuses at the end of the year and into the first two months of the New Year. After associates receive their bonuses, they leave their firm. This churn creates a void at the firm which usually needs to be filled by hiring more associates.

The summer months are usually a slower time to get hired because summer associates are working at the firm. The partners try to keep the students busy and do not have time to train or hire new associates with two or fewer years of experience. Also, the recruiting coordinators and hiring partners are busy with the summer programs and do not have time to work on lateral hires. Even though most large firms have a coordinator for summer programs and one for lateral hires, even with these firms, summer tends to have less focus on lateral hiring.

Come September, late-year hiring needs are unclear because first-year law students start work. Again, partners and senior associates concentrate on getting the new associates up and running and do not have time for lateral hiring. October through December is a slightly better time to make a move if you are not expecting a bonus. As in most industries, however, the process is usually slow from Thanksgiving through New Year’s. Firms have holiday parties, partners try to close deals before the end of the year, and associates strive to either make their minimum-hour requirement or hit their bonus numbers.

Although this is all true, there are some exceptions. If you have three to six years of experience, you may be able to move at any time. It really just depends on the need of the firm or how well you are marketed to the firm. Also, if you are a partner with portable business, you can move at any time of the year.

Obviously, making a move to another firm is a very big decision and could be extremely stressful. You should take the time to evaluate all the pros and cons of a move to another firm before you start your search. A good legal recruiter can assist you with the evaluation process and present opportunities that may be a good fit for your long-term career goal.

Why I Believe BCG Attorney Search is the Greatest Legal Recruiting Firm in the World

BCG Attorney Search

“The Nation’s Standard in Attorney Search and Placement”

The very foundations of BCG Attorney Search are built upon the ever-present need to constantly improve. This is evident in several aspects of how this business is run. I personally feel that BCG Attorney Search is the greatest recruiting firm in the world. The reasons for this are described below.

First, we only do law firm placements and have not diluted this important fundamental by having several different and diverting focuses at any one time. This means that when an attorney approaches us, they are dealing with experts because we are dealing with and studying the same law firms day in and day out. Through geographically segmenting our efforts, we have assured that each recruiter in every area we serve has the best possible understanding of their law firm clients. We have made the decision not to do in-house placements because we know that in-house placements will only serve to widely disperse our efforts and never make us an expert in anything.

This strategy has also allowed us to emerge as the search firm with the most law firm positions in the world. This is something the market notices and attracts a great deal of candidates.

Second, we stress an extremely high work product here. No search firm produces a better work product than us. The quality of our work product communicates to the firms who review our submissions that we know what we are doing. It also allows us to consistently learn more about candidates—and the market in general—than our competitors do. In addition, by producing such an outstanding work product, the firms we are dealing with take our efforts seriously. Everyday, our recruiters are being pushed to produce a better and better work product.

Third, through our website, we communicate a great deal of information. This communication draws traffic to our site and establishes us as experts in our chosen field. Our website is probably the most widely viewed web site in the permanent law firm placement field in the world.

Fourth, we use technology in radical ways that are years ahead of our competition. Through mass email, the distribution of our jobs to thousands of subscribers each day, the personal response we provide to each submission we receive and more, we are consistently communicating with a greater and greater audience than our competitors. By building a substantial community of people who are aware of our abilities, we are reinforcing the message that we are better than our competition hundreds of times each day.

Fifth, we have a super group of people who are committed to our mission and communicate our mission to everyone in this organization and the outside world. By consistently communicating our mission and unique organization goals and differences, we are spreading the word that we are, in fact, much better than our competition.

Sixth, we make efforts geared towards improving the legal community as a whole. Through our annual publication, The BCG Attorney Search Guide to Class Ranking and Law Review at America’s Top Law Schools, we are driving home a message about our expertise as researchers and attorneys to a diverse audience that includes (1) law schools, (2) law students, (3) practicing attorneys, and (4) law firms. The levels we go to service the legal community through this and our other written efforts are unparalleled by any other American legal search firm.

Seventh, through aggressive advertising and a well conceived branding strategy, we are driving our name home to everyone in the legal community. In addition, we ensure that our advertising is as timely as possible. There are few practicing attorneys in the United States who have not heard of our firm. We probably do more advertising than any other permanent attorney placement firm in the United States.

Eighth, we have uniform standards for our work. Every recruiter who works in our firm is expected to do a similar amount of work each week and produce a consistently good work product. By ensuring that we are all operating at similar production levels, we can ensure the orderly growth of our company through consistent revenue generation.

Ninth, we are a team. Through our weekly teleconferences, our BCG College, our weekly goals and our constant exchange of information, we are the most formidable team in the American legal recruiting field. No group tries harder to achieve each others goals. No group wants more than anything to see its other members succeed. By lessening competition, ensuring that we are consistently helping one another, we experience market domination.

Each and every day we come to work we are thinking of how we intend to raise the bar that day. Every idea we have, every innovation we make, is something that raises the bar and takes us more into the realm of being much better than we were before.

Do One Thing and Do it Well

When you are focused you get results.

At BCG Attorney Search all we do is place associate and partner-level attorneys in law firms.  We do not do not make placements in corporations or with in-house legal departments.  We do not place contract attorneys.  We do not work with secretaries or paralegals.

A BCG Attorney Search recruiter could not tell you the first thing about how to get a job with an in-house legal department, as a contract attorney, paralegal or legal secretary.

But for the type of attorneys who use BCG Attorney Search, this level of focus is exactly what they expect and are entitled to.  Over 80% of the attorneys we work with are graduates of top 25 law schools and coming from AmLaw 100 law firms.  And our law firm clients also know the typical BCG Attorney Search candidate is also focused enough that they cannot imagine working in any place other than a law firm .  As a consequence,

Simply put, BCG Attorney Search candidates want to deal with experts in the legal marketplace and believe their recruiter cannot truly know they market when they are doing several different things at once.

In your life and career it is also crucial that you do one thing and do it well.

Will a Clerkship Enhance My Marketability?

I have been offered a clerkship with a state court of appeals.  Will taking that position enhance my marketability?  Currently I am a 2L, top 10%, in a second-tier law school.  Thanks for your help.

It depends.  As discussed below, a state court clerkship will generally enhance your marketability if you are planning on working in the state where you are clerking.  Nevertheless, the value of a clerkship should not necessarily be something that you view as a tool to make you marketable.  Most importantly, the skills and insight you will acquire during your clerkship will be something that should help you throughout your career.

A state court clerkship is likely to make you marketable if you are considering working in the state where you will be clerking.  It is useful to examine the different types of clerkships.  Each type of clerkship has its advantages and disadvantages.  In order to help you understand the role a clerkship will have in your marketability, the differences between federal and state clerkships are analyzed below.
Federal Clerkships At the Federal level, the order of prestige of clerkships is typically: (1) the Supreme Court, (2) circuit (appellate) clerkships, (3) federal district court (trial court) clerkships, (4) clerkships with United States magistrates (who do a lot of the “grunt work” for federal district court judges).  There are also several specialized courts (such as Federal Tax Court) that are of approximately the same prestige level as federal district court clerkships.

Appellate clerkships involve mainly research and writing about issues the trial court has already ruled upon and reviewing the district court’s errors.  Appellate clerkships typically involve more arcane and novel issues of law than are typically litigated at the trial level.  In an appellate clerkship you are less likely to get to know the lawyers involved in the underlying litigation.

District court clerkships involve actual issues being litigated at the trial court level and typically have more in-court action.  In a district court clerkship you may see many of the same lawyers in the court day in and day out.  In a circuit court clerkship, you are likely to see the attorneys involved only when they present their appellate arguments in court.

There are also numerous distinctions between clerkships at the federal level.  For example, clerking for the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court is generally considered the most prestigious clerkship.  Similarly, a clerkship with a federal district judge in the eastern district of New York is more prestigious than a clerkship with a federal district judge in Bay City, Michigan, for example.   Attorneys who clerk for the most prestigious judges are typically those whose “marketability” is likely to be increased as a result.
Typically, the most prestigious clerkships have been those with federal judges.  At top national law schools, students compete very aggressively for federal clerkships and do so more so than they do for state judicial clerkships.  Given the prestige of a federal clerkship, it can often make you marketable far beyond the geographic area where you are clerking.

State Court Clerkships There are different distinctions in the state court system; ordinarily, you will also have a Supreme Court, appellate courts and trial courts.  The same prestige distinctions are also present at the state level, with a state Supreme Court clerkship being the most prestigious.  Just as certain federal district courts in various geographical locations are considered prestigious places to clerk in, so too are the state courts in different states.  In general, if you are clerking for an appellate court in a major state, this will be more prestigious than if you are doing the same thing in a smaller state.

The problem with a state court clerkship is typically something that is also an advantage.  While a state court clerkship will not necessarily increase your chances of being marketable anywhere throughout the United States, it can do you a tremendous amount of good in the area where you are clerking.  Clerking for a state court will make you a candidate with important local contacts.  The fact of the matter is that most litigation is actually conducted in the state courts.  Accordingly, a state court clerkship will provide you with a better understanding of state law than you would ever get as a federal clerk.  If you are planning on working in the area where you are clerking, the state court clerkship should be enormously valuable.
You need to remember that accepting a clerkship is much like the decision of where you decided to go to law school.  There are major national law schools that vary in prestige and there are smaller local law schools that vary in prestige.  For example, attending a law school like Yale is going to give you a serious advantage when you are applying to positions throughout the United States.   A law school like Yale might be compared to clerking on the Supreme Court. Conversely, a smaller more local law school like the University of Toledo is not going to give you as much an advantage throughout the United States.  This school will, however, probably give you good options in Toledo, Ohio.

Accordingly, before you accept your clerkship, I would recommend having a good understanding of whether or not you want to work in the area where you will be clerking.  The clerkship is most likely to make you marketable if you are seeking to work in the state where you are clerking.  I would also do some research into where the judge’s former clerks ended up working.  By learning this you can also get a decent idea of what your marketability might be following the clerkship.

Additionally, you have stated a concern about being “marketable”; nevertheless, you have not told me where you would like to be marketable.  Do you want to be marketable in the area you are clerking in?  Do you want to be marketable to a law firm, corporation, public interest group, prosecutor’s office?  You get the idea.  You should also think through the answers to these questions as you are deciding whether or not to clerk.
The value of your clerkship should not necessarily be viewed as a tool to make you marketable.  Clerking is something that gives you tools and memories that most clerks carry with them throughout their careers.  When you sit on the judge’s side of the bench, you get the feeling that you are really part of the legal process and have the idea of how decisions are made and the implications these decisions have on peoples’ lives.  Most clerks describe the year they spent clerking as the most relaxing, intellectually challenging and interesting year of their lives.  And this is really the essence of a clerkship.  It allows you to see the inner workings of the legal system, work closely with a judge and will provide you with a level of illumination about the legal system itself that you will carry with you throughout your legal career.

My belief is that you should not clerk simply because you think it is something that will get you a better position.  A clerkship is something that you should do because it will add depth and meaning to your future legal career.  I do not believe that a state court clerkship (especially with an appellate judge) can possibly hurt your marketability.  Indeed, the skills and understanding you pick up during your clerkship will be something you can carry with you throughout your career.

Conclusions In order to determine whether you should take a state court clerkship, it will be important that you analyze whether or not you want to work in the area of the country where you may be clerking.  While a state court clerkship is typically not as prestigious as a federal one, it is something that can provide you with important local contacts and knowledge of state law.  More importantly, I seriously doubt that a state court clerkship will hurt you.  Instead, a state court clerkship will provide you with tools and an understanding of the legal system you can carry with you throughout your career.

While I have saved this for last, I believe that an important component of your question involves a brief discussion in this conclusion.  You are a second year law student and it is only December.  If your goal is to be marketable to a law firm, you may be “barking up the wrong tree” at this point by simply seeking a clerkship.  Instead, you should accelerate your job search and apply to more law firms and look at more sources of information if working in a law firm is something you want to do.  If you are considering accepting a clerkship just to make yourself more marketable, you are not doing yourself, the judge you will be working for, or the justice system itself any favors.

A Hot Practice Area for the Economic Downturn

On a meeting with our BCG Attorney Search recruiters earlier this week we discussed the candidates who were getting the most interviews. Without a doubt the “hot” market right now is for associates is labor and employment. I also had dinner earlier this week with the recruiting director of a large national law firm here in Atlanta. He said that labor and employment is so out of control in terms of its business it is incredible.

The great thing about the legal market is that the work moves around. When one practice area is experiencing issues another starts to get better. This is what is happening with labor and employment.

When people get laid off some file lawsuits against their employer. This is making labor and employment firms busier and busier. In addition, when companies andlaw firms prepare for large scale layoffs they hire labor and employment attorneys to assess the situation. Given the dire predictions for the 2009 calendar year and the increasing layoff in the market, I think this is going to be a great year for labor and employment attorneys.

What does this mean for you?

If you are in general commercial litigation do your best to get some labor and employment cases under your belt asap–this will make you more marketable. If you are a law student you should press for jobs in this field.

Labor and employment is going gangbusters. This is great news for labor and employment attorneys because you are now very, very marketable.

How Valuable is an LLM in Increasing Marketability?

How valuable is earning an LL.M. in a particular field (such as International Business and Trade law, or Intellectual Property law just to cite two examples) in improving an entry level lawyer’s marketability?

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 US 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 LLM degrees are created equal.  One of the most respected LLM 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 healthcare law, will certainly enhance one’s resume, it is unlikely that an LL.M. will in and of itself make the difference in your job search.

Not all LLM 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 LL.M. programs only attract indigenous law firms.  Consequently, if you want to practice as a healthcare attorney in Florida, don’t go for an LLM 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.

Choosing The Small Versus The Large Firm

The recent Madoff ponzi scheme, the similar ponzi scheme of the Dreier law firm and the complete meltdown of Blagojevich, the Governor of Illinois, have all got me thinking.

All over our country there are countless people who are trying to be something they are not. They want more money because they feel this will somehow do something more for their lives.

What does this mean for your legal career?

In my years of recruiting I have seen so many attorneys through good careers away by only being concerned with the money. Most often the highest paying firms often offer attorneys the least chance for partnership. Time and time again, however, most attorneys go with the short term prospect of more money over the possibility of making partner and winding up in a stable law firm.

The way most attorneys think is very confusing to me. The instability that many expose themselves to is very confusing to me. I think that the most intelligent thing attorneys can do in the present day economy is to find a law firm where they are going to be secure.

Several years ago I was interviewing with a law firm in Los Angeles that paid below market rate. I liked the people in the firm and it seemed like a very nice place to work. The partner in the law firm who was the name partner told me while he was interviewing me that I would never make as much money in the law firm as at large law firms, but that I would always have a job. He told me about the stability of the firm and its partners and that this was a very smart place for me to be practicing law.

I chose not to work at this firm and instead chose recruiting. That was almost a decade ago.

Since that decade has passed the law firm I was working at when I interviewed with the small firm in Los Angeles has gained and lost so many partners I do not think I know anyone there anymore. Many of the partners from this firm are no longer practicing law. In addition, I have watched people that I know early in my career work at a succession of 7-8 jobs in different law firms during this same period of time.

This small firm that I interviewed is still there. With one exception, each of the seven partners who interviewed me when I interviewed with the firm are still there. The firm is still chugging along and the people who work there seem secure and happy. When I got married several years ago I even hired this firm to do my will and some other formalities. The people there are all happy.

The attorneys in this firm still make a bit less money. Who care, though? They are happy and have security and are not playing crazy games with their careers. I really respect this firm and its attorneys. Had I chosen to work in that firm instead of recruiting, I would respect myself for choosing that firm.

You need to be careful with your career and the choices you make.

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.