What do you have to offer your future employer?

Here’s some practical advice for senior associates, of all practice areas, looking to make a lateral move: start thinking about your business development prospects and what you can do to market yourself to potential clients once you make your lateral transition.  While this advice is of particular importance when considering lateraling from a large national or international law firm to a smaller national or regional law firm (as these firms almost uniformly ask about a candidates business development plans prior to or during the interview process), it also holds true for senior associates looking to transition to larger firms as well.

Consider putting together an informal business development and marketing plan that explains to law firms what you have done in the past to network and establish your presence in the market, as well as what you plan to do in the future. For example, be prepared to discuss your prior and future publishing activities, including articles, client alerts, blog postings, and white papers. You will also want to discuss any conferences you have attended and/or presented at, as well as online networking activities (again, blogging comes to mind).  You should also consider prospective client contacts, both among existing firm clients, law school classmates, personal contacts and other possible sources of referral business.

You should offer to provide this information to potential employers even prior to being asked for such information. Presenting this information to prospective employers in a thoughtful and concise written format will often make the difference between receiving and not receiving an offer. Although law firms don’t necessarily expect senior associates to come in with a book of business, they do want the assurance, particularly at smaller or more regional law firms, that prospective hires are business-minded and are thinking about their potential long-term contributions to the firm.

Taking Charge of Your Mentoring Experience

Mentoring relationships are as old as the legal profession itself. In the earliest days of legal practice, mentoring and apprenticeship were the only way lawyers could learn their craft. Although legal training is more formalized today, mentoring remains a key component of attorney professional development. This is because mentoring was, and continues to be, one of the most effective ways to pass on skills, knowledge, and cultivate critical professional relationships.

Attorneys at all levels can reap benefits from the guidance and instruction of a good mentor.  In addition to providing necessary instruction and development of legal skills, a mentor can help associates navigate the often tricky internal politics of a law firm, become a much needed ally and advocate, and help expand the associate’s professional network both inside and outside the firm.  Associates over the years have reported mixed experiences with law firms’ efforts to provide formal, structured mentoring programs. For some, the mentoring relationship is a vital piece in the associate’s development. In these instances, the mentor’s guidance and shared expertise becomes an important part of the associate’s skill and relationship building and fosters a sense of loyalty to both the mentor and the firm. For others, the relationship feels like a perfunctory, “box checked” experience offered by the firm to satisfy internal and external demands and perceptions, but ends up being a program which has little if any meaning or effectiveness.

It has been my experience that structured mentoring programs often struggle (or fail) because associates are matched with partners either randomly or based on practice area. There is usually little effort to ensure compatibility in terms of a shared background or common interests.  As many partners and associates will attest, a meaningful connection is really at the heart of the most effective mentor-mentee relationships. And although it may seem counterintuitive, it is not necessary for a mentor to share the same practice area as the mentee.  In fact, this arrangement is sometimes preferable to both parties because the associate has the option of being more open and honest about matters pertaining to skill development, firm structure and politics, and the associate’s true career aspirations.

Mentoring relationships can also falter if associates sit back passively and wait for the partner to take the lead. As with most things in life, if you want a successful mentoring relationship, you have to take control of the situation and assume responsibility for keeping it going. Much of what you get out of your mentoring experience depends on your willingness to be proactive and to ask for what you need. This begins with finding the right mentor. If your assigned mentor is clearly not a good fit, ask to be reassigned to someone with whom you think you might be more compatible. If that is not possible, an informal (i.e. unassigned) relationship with a superior in the firm with whom you feel a connection or would like to get to know better can serve the same purpose.

Once the relationship has been established, assume that it is up to you to keep the relationship moving forward. You may wish to create a list of objectives to be clear about what you would like to achieve from your interactions with your mentor. Clearly outlined objectives can provide structure to your meetings and serve as a useful guide with which to measure your progress. You may wish to consider the following when creating your goals:

• What exactly do I want from this relationship? Skill building? Networking opportunities? Career guidance?
• What specific opportunities can this particular relationship provide me?
• What do I hope will be different for me as a result of this experience?
• How will I measure success as the relationship progresses?

Keep in mind as you move forward in the mentoring relationship that the focus of your meetings should be on the successful achievement of your goals.  It is important that you continue to play an active role in the relationship by assuming responsibility, staying organized, and keeping the momentum going. It is also critical that you demonstrate respect for your mentor’s time.  Keep the following pointers in mind when meeting with your mentor:

• Take responsibility for initiating meetings.
• Know in advance what you wish to discuss at each meeting. Prepare an agenda, either mentally or literally.
• Balance your comments with positive experiences and challenges you are experiencing. Come to meetings ready to share experiences that moved you closer to achieving your goals as well as experiences that set you back.
• Solicit feedback from your mentor on what he or she is observing in you.
• With your mentor’s guidance, assess your progress, identify setbacks, and determine next steps.

Remember that in addition to a meaningful connection, the success of any mentoring program depends on the mentees’ willingness to be actively involved in their own success. If the relationship is not helping you to meet your objectives, it is important to speak up so the appropriate adjustments can be made.

If the opportunity is right, it is worth the wait.

At least once a week, I feel like I end up lecturing my candidates on being patient with respect to the firms with which they have interviewed.  Having  been a candidate myself, and therefore at the mercy of the law firms, I completely understand how painful the process can be, but I am surprised at the number of candidates that sour on a firm based on the time it takes for it to respond with an offer or rejection.  For example, I am working with a strong corporate candidate with a stellar background in M&A and securities.  Originally from Chicago, she moved to Colorado about four years ago for family reasons, and she has been working with a top firm in Denver since then.  She is now looking to return to Chicago, and based on her credentials, we had no problem getting her an interview with one of the best firms in town.  In fact, the firm was impressed enough with the candidate’s resume that it skipped the initial round of interviews and went straight to flying my candidate into town to meet the entire practice group.

The interview went well from the perspective of my candidate, and she returned to Colorado hopeful that she would receive an offer from the firm.  And that is when the painful portion of the process began.

A week passed.  She emailed me for updates.  I followed up with the firm and received some initial feedback that was very positive.  However, because the attorneys in the group were so busy (hence the need to bring on another associate), they had not yet been able to interview the other two candidates they wanted to meet before making a final decision.  I relayed this information to my candidate and promised to follow up the following week.

The following week came and went, and as promised, I followed up with the firm.  Nothing to report.  Same thing for the next week.  Finally, about three and a half weeks after the interview, the recruiter called me to apologize for taking so long to get back to me, and then informed me that the group still had no decision on my candidate’s interview.  I immediately informed my candidate that she would need to sit tight for another week or more, but by now she sounded a bit annoyed and said something like “when a firm delays likes this, it usually means they are not interested.”

Um, not true.  Not true at all.  I cannot tell you how many firms I work with that have taken weeks—make that months, to get back to me post-interview, and many of them have extended offers to the candidate.  The passage of time, especially when dealing with a large, busy law firm, means nothing other than the group has not yet made a decision regarding the candidate’s interview.

In the mind of the candidate (stereotypically speaking, of course), it should not be that hard for a firm to get its people together to decide whether to hire someone with whom it has interviewed.  Thanks to email, the group doesn’t even have to meet face to face—just circulate a couple of messages about who likes who, and then make a decision based on the majority vote.  Shouldn’t take more than a day, right?

Wrong.  The reality is that no matter how much a firm likes a candidate, client work comes before recruiting.  That means that if a client matter arises unexpectedly, recruiting decisions are placed on the back burner, and a candidate can be left waiting for weeks for an answer.  Likewise, if hiring decisions need to be approved by the Hiring Partner for the firm (or worse, a committee of attorneys in charge of hiring), additional delays may result if one or more of these attorneys is not available to provide approval.

This is precisely what happened to my corporate candidate in Colorado.  The firm gave some initial feedback that was positive, but before they could interview the other two candidates they planned to interview, the head of the group was pulled away on a serious client-related matter.  My candidate was left to wait.  And wait.  And wait.

Waiting is the worst.  I think we can all agree on that.  But just because a firm leaves a candidate waiting for weeks (or even months), that candidate does not get to jump to conclusions that the firm is not interested.  In the case of my Colorado candidate, not only did she start to assume there was no interest on the part of the firm, but she started to get angry with the delay and called the firm “rude” and “inconsiderate.”  I did what I could to counter this, but my candidate became more and more convinced that the firm was stringing her along, and with each passing day, no matter how hard I tried, her bitterness grew.

Then, as luck would have it, the offer came.

And instead of just being excited to have the offer, this candidate had to work through her bitterness in order to get back to where she had been shortly after the interview.  At one point, she almost turned down the offer because she felt as if the firm did not want her “enough.”  Eventually, after much discussion, she realized what I knew all along:  firms are large institutions that often move at a snail’s pace, but this does not mean that the firm is not enthusiastic about a specific candidate.  It simply means that we need to learn to be a little more patient.  After all, if the opportunity is a good, long-term fit, it is worth the wait.

FEMALE PARTNER GIVES GREAT ADVICE TO WOMEN WORKING IN FIRMS

As a former practicing female attorney who now counsels my women attorney candidates on gender issues they are experiencing within their own firms, I particularly loved this article below.  Adrienne Randall Bond discusses how she has thrived as a female partner practicing in the Houston area.  Ms. Bond ultimately transitioned away from BigLaw to find her way, but she has good advice for female attorneys in all firms, big or small.

http://www.law.com/jsp/tx/PubArticleTX.jsp?id=1202520675454&slreturn=1

Tis the Season for Lawyers with a Computer Science or Electrical Engineering Background

As most IP lawyers know, market needs are constantly shifting depending on the kinds of technical expertise required by client matters. For months, there might be an overabundance of patent litigation and prosecution positions listed for candidates with a mechanical engineering or a biology background, while at other times it seems all law firms want are lawyers with chemistry backgrounds.

For the last couple of months, law firms on both coasts have unquestionably been focused on IP litigation and prosecution candidates with undergraduate and/or advanced degrees in electrical engineering or computer science. This trend has been consistent throughout our markets, including New York, Boston, Washington, DC, San Francisco, Silicon Valley, and Los Angeles and – while it has been a notable trend for the last couple of months – it will likely end soon, as firms shift their focus to candidates with other technical backgrounds.

For those of you with a technical background in computer science or electrical engineering: this is the season for you to seize new opportunities.  Even if you are not certain whether you ultimately want to make a move, now is the time to explore options, since the market is currently heavily favoring candidates with your background.

If you are a patent litigator or prosecutor – and you are at all contemplating a move within the next several months to one year – pick up the phone and contact a recruiter who can help you explore options and capitalize on the market while it is working in your favor. Lastly, keep in mind that the job search and hiring process can take a while. It’s best to start early so that you create every possible advantage and opportunity for yourself.

Choosing a Recruiter for Your Lateral Partner Search

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

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

Online Job Boards Help Job Seekers

Try as we might, recruiters cannot help everyone. There are many unemployed professionals who are looking for their next position. The Wall Street Journal recently featured an article about online job boards, For the Jobless, Web Sites Offer More Options. Online job boards can definitely help job-seekers find their right match!

BCG’s parent company, EmploymentScape, has a job board custom-tailored for the needs of attorney job hunters: LawCrossing, the largest legal job portal in the United States. I have been a long-time LawCrossing subscriber – for many more years than I have been employed by this company – and definitely think that it is a phenomenal site for legal positions. I always recommend it to my job-searching friends. Check it out at www.lawcrossing.com.

Pick Your Practice Area Wisely

As we are riding the roller-coaster ride that is the US economy, it seems to be a great time to revisit practice areas selection for associates. There are two types of practice areas – those that thrive in “up” markets and those that thrive in “down” markets. Right now, the market is as down as it can be.

Who’s busy?
Bankruptcy
Litigation (slightly busy, and we are expecting more hours out of you litigation associates this year)

Who’s not busy?
M&A
Capital Markets/Finance
Real Estate

There are certain practices that are able to exist in both “up” and “down” markets:
Tax and other specialty practices
Intellectual Property

Why? Tax supports many of a firm’s practice areas and, thus, has a slight “internal hedge” against a down market. Intellectual property involves different types of work as well. Even though IP transactional work has slowed to a crawl, patent prosecution and IP litigation are still rolling along.

My advice? When selecting a practice area in your early career, know whether or not your practice is an up or down market practice. It will allow you to plan to ride the roller-coaster more enjoyably – e.g. if you chose to become a bankruptcy associate in a top firm, expect that you will be slammed when all of your attorney friends are slow and on the hunt for work.

The Downside of the Internet

Here’s a little secret: one of the first things a future employer will do is “Google” you. A good recruiter will Google you first – before the firm has a chance to do so. What is out there about you?

• Last week, I was recently speaking to an attorney who was interested in working with BCG on his job search. He is working at a big firm and was looking to make a lateral move. In our preliminary conversation, he mentioned that he had worked at two firms. After our conversation, I wanted to see what was out there about him – and I found that he had worked at a third firm as well. When I asked him about it, he asked me how I had heard about that. He was shocked when I said a ten second Google search. If I found it, any potential employer can find it as well. Be honest. Full disclosure.
• Yesterday, David Lat from Above the Law highlighted another unfortunate case. A 21 year old who is scheduled to begin Fordham Law School this fall was featured in The Horny Issue of Time Out New York. This information will come up on the Internet for years to come. This girl has already hurt her law career – and she hasn’t even begun law school or signed on the dotted line of her law school loans. Why would she want to handicap her future career prospects? Query whether a firm like Davis Polk would be interested in someone who has appeared in The Horny Issue or whether Fordham Law would want someone with such poor judgment. All types of people work at law firms – some with interesting and fascinating “hobbies.” What you do is your business – but it is better to keep it on the down-low.
• Recently, a candidate came to us and noted that he was gay, but that he didn’t want to advertise that fact to potential employers. (Note to job hunters: the vast majority of firms don’t care if you are gay.) Of course there isn’t any obligation for you to disclose your sexual orientation. It’s your business. Guess what? A super fast Google search. His sexual orientation disclosed to one and all. So, although he had intended to keep his orientation a secret, he really hadn’t.
• I am not going to even address the countless law students who have inappropriate photos and language on their MySpace or Facebook pages and other social networking sites. There are stories about those jobless people all the time.

Moral of the story? Always know what is out there about you! Do your best to control that information. If you don’t, you’ll be doing extensive damage control for a long time to come.

Unemployed? STAY BUSY.

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

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

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

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