Now, in the aftermath of the economic downturn, and with some new growth trends for the first time in a number of years, firms are once again hiring.  The difference, however, is the caution with which firms are treating their recruiting and hiring process, and the resulting length of time and number of steps involved in the hiring process can be very surprising (and frustrating) to candidates who have not been on the market or conducted a job search in a number of years.

In the current market, you should expect that the interview process will likely consist of the following steps:

1 – Submission of your materials.

2 – Request for follow-up materials.

3 – A reply with a rejection or an interview request (this can take anywhere from one day to, in some cases I’ve seen recently, nearly three months).

4 – A screening interview with one or two partners, typically over the phone or via videoconference.

5 – A follow-up interview in-person or via videoconference with more of the practice group’s attorneys, including associates.

6 – On occasion, additional follow-up interviews with practice group attorneys in other offices (if the firm has a large practice group that does a lot of cross-collaborative work).

7 – Waiting for the firm to get through the same interview series with its other top candidates.

8 – An initial offer, subject to negotiation on lateral salary, relocation expenses, etc.

9 – A conflicts check upon acceptance of the offer (this can take a surprisingly long time or even foreclose an acceptance if difficult or insurmountable conflicts arise).

Not every job search goes this way, or includes every single one of these steps, but a lengthy and involved process has become the norm, even for strong candidates and when a firm has a relatively urgent need to fill the position.

Firms are more intent than ever on making wise, sustainable hiring decisions, and while this is good to see for a given firm if you eventually join their ranks, as a candidate it can be understandably frustrating.  Going into the job search process armed with this knowledge, and getting started on your search earlier than you think you need to, will hopefully alleviate some of the potential frustration.

As always, best of luck with your job search!

For whatever reason, I have seen a number of candidates who do not appear to make good fitness evaluations, and as a consequence seek to apply to positions for which they are clearly unqualified.  It is perhaps understandable that some candidates would want to try to “fit” their credentials into the qualifications of a desired position.  But by doing too much “stretching,” they lose credibility and waste valuable time applying for positions that are obviously not a good fit for them.  This is why making a proper assessment of fitness at the beginning of a job search is so important.  For example, one of the most important basic criteria is the specific type of background or experience desired for the job.  I recently had not one but two candidates contact me separately about applying to positions that were seeking applicants with very different background and experience than what both of these candidates possessed.  I then explained to each of them that firms will not consider them to be something that they are not.  Another basic criterion that is sometimes ignored is the range of years of experience sought by a job description.  I have seen senior candidates seek to apply to positions seeking only junior applicants with 2-4 years or so of experience, well below the candidates’ own level.  While these candidates often make a valid point that they have more experience, the law firms unfortunately do not work that way.  While firms may show some degree of flexibility with their stated desired range (1-2 years or so), they will virtually never consider a candidate who is 5, 10 or 15 or more years beyond that range.

The fitness of a candidate to a particular job is one of the most important evaluations that needs to be taken early in the job search process.  Proper evaluations will result in applications that have the best chance of success and a minimum of wasted time on job opportunities that are not appropriate.

Partner/spouse needs to relocate

This is one of the most common general reasons attorneys embark on a job search – their partner or spouse gets a job opportunity (or is accepted into a graduate program) in another city where the attorney’s current firm does not have an office to which they could transfer.  Out of all the potential reasons for a quick lateral move, this is the one most likely to be interpreted charitably or favorably by a potential new employer, primarily because it is a circumstance that is somewhat beyond the attorney’s control.

Given the current modern economy, where it is statistically likely that someone will switch careers multiple times, and also because every partner, spouse, or family member is a potential earner, it is not an unusual circumstance or a potential sign of anything negative when an attorney needs to make a move for this reason.  On top of that, attorneys in this situation are typically quite happy in their current firm, have developed good working relationships, and are able to get excellent recommendations from their current partners due to the understandable nature of their departure.

The key in this situation is to thoroughly explain your need to move to a prospective employer, emphasizing that you are in good standing with your current firm and did not expect to have to switch firms and locations (assuming these are true – honesty is always best).  You should also discuss the move with your current firm, and make sure that you can get strong recommendations from your current partners, as this will help ease any concerns from a prospective employer.

Your new firm’s business took a dive and they need to let you go

This is another common reason for attorneys needing to relocate again shortly after joining a new firm – perhaps a key partner or client departs, and the business that led to the attorney being hired in the first place has now disappeared and the practice group is over-staffed.  A lot of firms have a first-in-first-out policy if they have multiple strong attorneys in a given practice group and not enough work to go around.

The upside to this scenario is again that you are back on the market for reasons beyond your direct control.

The downside is that any attorney who is let go for business reasons can be perceived as not being as “valuable” to that attorney’s current/former firm, regardless of how good that attorney actually is.

To try and mitigate this, it is imperative that you clearly explain the reasons for your move to a prospective employer and make sure that you can get good recommendations from your current/recently former partners, particularly if they are willing to back up your explanation for needing to seek a new job (this can be rare, as business or a lack thereof is often a touchy subject in the law firm world, but I have seen it happen and it doesn’t hurt to ask).

Your new firm turns out to be a terrible work environment

This category can include a wide variety of more specific reasons an attorney might be looking to make another lateral move shortly after a new firm.  Perhaps the work assignments are entirely different than what was represented during the interview stage, a particular partner turns out to be a nightmare to work for, or you come to realize that the prospects for bonuses and career advancement are small to nonexistent.

Whatever the specific reason, this is the most difficult situation under which to embark on a job search, because prospective employers are likely to interpret this situation (fairly or unfairly) as representing one or more of the following:

1) You are not likely to be loyal – aside from stellar credentials and a proven ability to develop client business, the one major factor law firms look to above all else is evidence of loyalty and stability in your work history.  The hiring and orientation process is time-consuming and expensive, and firms want to see evidence that you are going to stick around – jumping back into the job market shortly after a recent move stands in direct contradiction to this desired trait.

2) You cannot handle difficult work – any of us who have worked in a law firm have likely (and unfortunately) worked for or at least encountered partners who are not pleasant to work for, to put it as diplomatically as possible.  Having to work for the wrong partner can change the entire experience of being at a particular firm, and if there is no relief in sight, it is certainly understandable as to why you would want to leave.  However, the hiring partner(s) at a prospective new firm are more often than not going to interpret such a situation as you not being willing or able to handle difficult work (and they might be extremely demanding themselves).

3) You did not do your diligence – if, after a few short months, you find yourself disliking your new firm to the extent you want to leave, it is certainly fair for a prospective employer to wonder how much homework you did on your current firm or practice group before deciding to accept their offer if it differs entirely from your expectations only after a few short months.  Granted, it is not possible to discover all the potential pitfalls or issues with a prospective firm during the interview process, but we are talking about the likely perception of a potential employer when it looks like you are jumping ship because it’s not the right fit – a hiring partner will worry you may do the same at his or her firm, and discard your resume accordingly.

The perceptions of a potential new employer described above may not be fair at all times, but having discussed candidates, hiring procedures, and the desired traits of lateral attorneys with countless recruiting coordinators and hiring/managing partners, it is simply something that you will have to account for in your job search process if you are looking to make a lateral move shortly after joining your current firm.

In the hyper-competitive legal hiring market, each job opening results in the submission of hundreds of resumes, many from highly-qualified attorneys.  As such, the recruiting coordinators and hiring partners will often use any potential red flags to eliminate a candidate from consideration, and one major red flag is an unstable employment history.

What I typically (and highly) recommend in such a situation, even though it may not be what you want to hear, is sticking things out at your current firm and doing everything you can to remedy the issues that are fueling your desire to leave until you have been at that firm for at least a year or more to demonstrate evidence of loyalty and stability.  If you do decide to proceed with a new job search, however, it is best to keep things honest and simple and you should make sure that your explanation for seeking a new position is as diplomatic as possible.  The legal world is a small one, and you want to be perceived as the consummate professional you are, which means absolutely avoiding badmouthing your current firm or partners to a prospective new employer.

Conclusion

If you do find yourself needing or wanting to make a lateral move shortly after joining a new firm, it can be a tricky situation, and hopefully the above advice will allow you to enter the process more aware of the potential pitfalls of doing so.  As always, best of luck on your job search!

Too often, the resumes I see from junior attorneys, clerks, and law students scream, “I’m indecisive, and I don’t know what I want to be when I grow up.”  Law firms don’t generally want someone who doesn’t have an inclination toward a particular area of law.  An attorney without a clear idea of what areas interest her may end up liking the practice area that she happens to be hired into, but maybe she won’t, and she will want to switch after a year or two.  Such an attorney is essentially asking the firm to let her figure out what kind of law she likes, on their dime.  Why would a firm hire such a person?  Firms want someone who already knows what she wants, and will remain in the practice area that she is being hired for.

There is nothing wrong with trying different things while you are in law school; to a certain degree it is expected.  Even in the early stages of law practice, it can be possible, if the firm permits, to dip a toe in different practice areas.  In fact, certain firms make it their policy to “float” entry-level associates through different practice groups for a certain time period.  You can find out who these firms are from your career services office at school.  Keep in mind, however, that firms who will allow associates to experiment with different practice areas are not the norm.

By the time you are in your third year of law school and looking for your first job, your resume needs to show a direction.  You may have several directions in mind; there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.  It only means that the resume you send for a particular position needs to speak to that position.  You may certainly have different resumes for different types of positions.  For example, if you are targeting corporate positions, and you interned at an in-house legal department, that resume should highlight those skills.  The in-house job description should be several lines, while your stint at the Public Defender’s office should have little or no description.  For the litigation positions you are targeting, you should do the opposite.

If you still feel that your resume does not clearly highlight a particular direction, see if you can convince a professor of a topic you want to target to let you work as a research assistant.  This is usually only a 10-15 hour per week commitment, and the professor sometimes ends up being both a legal and a career mentor.  Professors often know the players in the legal community as well, and some still practice law (adjunct professors can be especially helpful in making connections).

Many, many junior lawyers don’t really know what they want to do.  However, don’t let your resume reflect this.  Have different resumes that highlight different skill sets and interests, so that you always show some kind of trajectory on your resume.

Transcripts are normally essential.  Grades count, although less so as you become more senior and your experience takes on increasing importance.  You usually do not need official transcripts – copies will do.  You will typically need them for every school you attended after high school, although some firms will be satisfied with just the law school transcripts. The transcript also needs to be readable.  This is not always easy.  For some reason, certain universities do not make readability a priority when designing their transcripts.  One issue that often arises with transcripts is the candidate’s final GPA.  Sometimes the transcript makes this clear.  But other times the final GPA is difficult to find, or cannot be found at all as some schools either do not keep track of GPA or they do so with their own unique alien system.  There is little you can do about this, of course.  But to the extent you can “translate” your GPA and/or class rank into English you should consider doing so on your resume, especially if your grades are good.  If they are not so good, then perhaps leaving them surrounded by a little mystery is the best policy.

Writing samples can vary by practice area.  For litigators, it is usually a brief.  For judicial clerks, it is often a judicial opinion.  For IP candidates, it may be a patent application or technical article.  Whatever it is, it needs to be written by the candidate with a minimum of editing by others.  It also needs to be:  (1) fairly brief; (2) readable and understandable; (3)  relevant to the practice area in which you are seeking employment; (4) perfect in terms of spelling, grammar, etc.; and (5) the document that best demonstrates the high quality of your legal writing.

Lastly, individual firms will sometimes request additional documents that are unique to them.  This is more common for IP candidates.  For example, I have seen requests for IP candidates to answer technical questions (some of them are out there, like preparing a patent application for a crossbow or for a buggy to operate on Pluto), summaries of recent experiments and even answers to technical “tests.”  But occasionally, firms seek additional information from other types of candidates as well.

Not to fear.  There are plenty of ways for you to figure out an appropriate number.  You need to be prepared for the question at all stages of your discussions with the potential employer.  You could be asked for your salary expectation at any point in the process, even in a preliminary phone interview.

How to arrive at that magic number?  It is time to do some research.  First, are you looking at an in house position, a law firm position, a government or non-profit position?  What is the size of the entity (law firm, company)?  What part of the country are you looking in? What is the industry sector (Insurance, IP, Corporate, etc.)?  All of these variables will help you arrive at a number.

Typically, in-house positions, government and non-profit sector attorney positions pay less than large and mid-sized law firms.  Federal government salaries are often determined on a pay grade basis, and are publicly available. State and local government salaries are also often publicly available, although they can be harder to find.  In-house positions for larger corporations tend to pay less than large firms, and more than government positions.  For smaller companies, in-house salaries are all over the map.

Large, full service law firm salaries in larger cities tend to start in the $130k-160 range for associates.  Salaries for these large firms may be less in smaller cities, because the cost of living is proportionately lower.  Sometimes, law firms, even national law firms, that specialize in certain areas of law can pay below market.  For example, boutique firms specializing in insurance defense, toxic tort, personal injury, family law, and labor and employment law sometimes pay less than the salaries referenced above.  IP salaries tend to be a bit higher than average associate salaries.

Small law firms and small company salaries vary widely.  A start-up corporation, even in a large city, may pay as little as $40k while it is getting ramped up.  Likewise, I have seen small law firms paying as little as $35k to start.  Plaintiff-side firms sometimes pay little in the way of salary, but allow opportunities for associates to cultivate their own clients, and get a cut of what business they bring in.

In addition to talking to attorneys in the market sectors/cities/entity types you are targeting, you should do all the online research you possibly can.  Here are some helpful sites, but keep in mind that the information may be outdated or even wrong.  Still, if you read enough of them, you can get an idea of an appropriate starting point for your salary negotiations.

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Attorney_%2f_Lawyer/Salary

http://www.aboutlawschools.org/jobs/salaries/

http://www.ehow.com/lawyer-salaries/

Your law school may also collect salary data from its alums, so call your school’s career services office and ask what salary information they have on file.

Still feel like a deer facing oncoming traffic?  Think about giving a salary range.  Whatever number you arrive at that would be comfortable for you, go a little below that and a lot above.  For example, if you would be happy with a salary of $70k, give a range of $65-85k.  The employer will probably not come in at your very bottom number, and may come in somewhere in the middle of the range, so your offer may be higher than what you would be happy with.

• Don’t give a specific number:  You don’t want to price yourself out of the job yet at the same time you want to get as much money as possible, therefore, try not to be the first one to offer up a number.  If you are asked to give your salary expectations, keep your answer general.  For example, salary is not the motivating force behind my move and I’m confident that the firm will offer me a salary congruent with the salary for a peer with my level of experience and expertise.
• What if the employer pushes for a number?  If you are pressed to give a number, speak in ranges.  For example, I would like to be paid in a range that in-line with your current compensation structure for someone at my level.  If you do not know how compensation is structured (and you are not working with a recruiter who can this information out for you), you should ask what you can expect (again ask for the range) for someone at your level with your experience.
• How much can you inflate your current salary? Firms will often ask what your current salary is. You must be straightforward with your current salary information and bonus and do not inflate the numbers by more than 10%.

Salary negotiations are much less stressful and way more effective when you are working with a recruiter. Recruiters will know what the going market rate is and will successfully negotiate a salary that you and your future employer feel good about.

Labor and employment law, however, is a relatively specialized practice that is almost always in some demand, and as happens to be especially hot right now – even just looking at the Los Angeles market alone, I see nearly a dozen open opportunities for labor and employment attorneys at the mid-level, and there are at least one or two opportunities in every major West Coast market.

The reason for this is fairly intuitive – if the economy is up, companies are hiring more employees, and perhaps re-tooling their benefit plans to accommodate a larger workforce and/or make their company more attractive to prospective hires.  If the economy is down, companies are laying people off, which often results in a high risk of litigation over anything from the reasons for termination to disputes over benefits determinations.  In other words, regardless of the state of the overall economy, companies will always have a need for legal expertise in this area.

Practicing in this area will also provide you with a lot of options for firm size and location – most all major law firms have some type of labor practice group, and there are a good number of firms who specialize their entire practice in this area, from the boutiques up to larger national labor firms with hundreds of attorneys.

If you are a younger attorney looking for a potential career direction, consider a specialty in labor and employment for the reasons outlined above.  And if you are an experienced labor and employment litigation associate looking to make a move, now is a fantastic time to get in touch with a BCG recruiter to discuss your options!

In order to be qualified to sit for the Patent Bar exam, a candidate needs to have at least a bachelor’s degree in a scientific or engineering field.  Passing the exam is not a simple task.  Typical pass rates are around 33% (give or take 6% or so), and this is from a group of highly capable scientists, engineers and lawyers who are not accustomed to failing anything.  Although IP is a relatively hot area, there is still strong competition.  Candidates who demonstrate the effort and ability to pass this exam will stand out from those who did not.  Moreover, as with patent agents, many firms will not even interview IP associate candidates who have not passed the Patent Bar exam.  It is thus clear that passing the exam will strengthen an associate’s status in the IP prosecution market, just as it does for a patent agent.  Of course, there are other important factors that affect this status as well.  One of these factors is the type of technical degree a candidate possesses.  I have found that IP prosecution candidates generally fall into four general categories.  First, there is the electrical engineering category, which also includes computer science, computer engineering and physics because these fields are often paired with electrical engineering in job descriptions.  This is, by far, the hottest IP category for job seekers.  The second is what is broadly called the “biotech” field.  This includes biotechnology, biology, molecular biology, genetics and “the life sciences,” and also includes chemistry (organic or inorganic), biochemistry, medical devices and pharmaceuticals.  These areas are also frequently found together in job descriptions.  There is some demand for these areas, but not as much as there used to be.  The last category is the “other” leftover areas that have limited demand, including mechanical engineering, materials, and other technical areas not named above.  Regardless of your technical background, however, you will strengthen your cause by passing the Patent Bar exam.

What is that little something extra?  It is experience.  Not the traditional experience one would expect a typical third, fourth or fifth year associate to have.  Firms want the kind of experience that sets a person aside from all the other people that are applying for the same position.

Non-legal professional experience is hot right now in certain areas of practice.  Having an advanced degree or having worked in your field prior to attending law school can greatly improve your standing among the other candidates for a job.  For example, if you are a patent attorney, firms would like you have a graduate degree in the technical field for which they have an interest.  It is fantastic if you also worked in that field, for example as an engineer or a biochemist, before attending law school.

Continued practice in a field that took a hit with the economic downturn is also very desirable.  If real estate is your area of practice, and you were able to continue to gain experience and advance your practice during the past five years, you have that little something extra.

Finally, having expertise in a niche area of the law is advantageous.  Examples include:  an energy law attorney with excellent FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) experience; a government contracts or reproductive rights attorney with industry experience; and a trusts and estates attorney that specializes in non-traditional family planning.

There is no longer a big demand for general litigators or jacks of all trades.  Whether or not this will turn around is unclear.  For now at least, specialists are the hot commodity.  If you don’t have one, you may want to evaluate where your career path is going.