Legal Career Advice: Keep Your Eyes Open!

Last week, I had the opportunity to revisit my law school days at my 10th law school reunion (go Fordham!) It is incredible to see how diverse the career paths of my classmates have been. Sure - there are those who joined a firm in 1998 and have now made partner there. But the vast majority have tried two or more law firms, before going in-house or on to another venture - either law or non-law related.

For many junior attorneys, partnership is the ultimate goal. That changes for many people as they gain seniority and realize that there are many other options for them. Some turn down partnership because they are more intrigued by another path.

In my class, we have spread like the diaspora around the country and the world. We are in so many different industries and are partners, counsel and associate at law firms big and small.

Here are some examples:
- partners at BigLaw firm in U.S.
- partners at BigLaw firms outside of the U.S.
- partners at smaller firms in NY and in smaller legal markets
- general counsel at a publicly-traded corporation
- general counsel at an investment firm
- solo practitioners
- in-house counsel
- government employees
- one (very) happy staff attorney
- one (very, very) happy legal recruiter!

You’ll have so many options throughout your career. Your career path has to work for you. Believe me - very few of my colleagues would have chosen to become a legal recruiter. But it completely works for me.

My advice for today: Work hard, be well-regarded among your colleagues and periodically assess your options.

My BCG Attorney Search colleagues and I are always here to discuss the legal market!

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Don’t Torture Yourself Post-Interview

Last week, I prepared a very qualified candidate for an interview for her “dream job.” Sure, she was a little nervous about a few questions she might be asked about her resume. After all, about a year ago, after working at her law firm for a number of years, she up and quit her job to care for an ailing family member and do volunteer work. Plus, she felt “rusty” in terms of her interviewing skills, in large part because she had not interviewed for a job since before graduating from law school.

By the time we conducted the preparation session for the interview, this candidate had done her homework and practiced answers to many of the questions we anticipated she would be asked. As we spoke, she fine-tuned her answers and articulated them in the most concise way. Moreover, she had researched the individuals with whom she was going to meet and crafted some insightful questions for each of the interviewers. By the time she was finished preparing for the interview, she was confident, excited and ready to go. As I always do, I asked her to call me after the interview to provide me a summary of how she thought it went.

As the obedient candidate that she is, she called me as soon as she finished the interview. That is when the self-torture began. She began recounting each and every sentence she articulated to each interviewer and began tearing each response apart. Within two minutes of calling me, she was practically in tears, convinced that she had sounded like an uneducated, inarticulate, unqualified candidate who had no chance of receiving an offer.

Now, don’t get me wrong, we are all human, and sometimes candidates say stupid things in interviews. But as this candidate recited the answers she provided to the questions asked, I thought she sounded fantastic. Sure, her answers were not “perfect,” and she may have said “ah” and “um” a few more times than she needed to, but overall, she relayed professional, concise answers that showed not only an interest in the job but a true expertise. However, in her mind, she had failed to explain in the best possible detail how and why she was the best candidate for the job. As our conversation continued, and her panic grew, I had to cut her off and begin my Post-Interview Lecture, which goes something like this:

DO NOT TORTURE YOURSELF AFTER AN INTERVIEW. Once it is over, there is absolutely nothing you can to do go back and re-answer the questions asked of you, so there is no use in obsessing about each and every word you said during the interview. Instead, take a deep breath, pat yourself on the back, and remind yourself that you prepared for the interview to the best of your ability and gave it your best shot.

Of course this lecture is completely inapplicable to the candidate who thinks he or she does not have to prepare for an interview, but I will save those individuals for another blog. If you have thoroughly prepared for an interview and given everything you have, then torturing yourself after the interview with the things you said (or failed to say) is completely counterproductive. Sure, there is always room for improvement and things that can be learned from an interview, and for those reasons, reflecting on the interview is very important. But reflecting on an interview is very different than obsessing about it and convincing yourself that you completely blew it.

After multiple calls to me, during which she relayed additional “stupid” things she said during her interview, I finally convinced my candidate to let it all go. Easier said than done, but I think she is starting to realize how destructive her behavior was. While she has not yet heard from the firm, and she is not confident that she will receive an offer for this job, she is no longer spending 90% of her time thinking about the “deficient” answers she gave and the “proper” answer she should have provided.

Or at least that is what she is telling me.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Fine tuning the resume in the electronic age

I will see a resume that sets off a red flag for me, from time to time.  Maybe it’s a confusing chronology, or some gaps in employment, and I start to feel like something that I’m missing.  Worse yet, like something is being obscured.  I can sometimes compare a resume I received some time in the past from a particular lawyer and find inconsistencies between it and their current copy.  When my internal alarm bell rings, I also go to LinkedIn.  Today, LinkedIn was kind enough to tell me that a lawyer who seemed to have too many employment moves in their career failed to include FOUR OTHER LAW FIRM employers on the resume that I saw.  I was concerned, but it didn’t take me long to discover that I didn’t have half of the story.

This particular resume wasn’t untruthful–there were no falsehoods that I could tell.  But this lawyer did choose to drop off over 5 years of post-admission legal experience.  I think it’s unlikely that a future employer won’t go through the same process I did in filling in the gaps.  I was never a fan of creative resume writing–I think that all your employers should be front and center.  Now the online world reinforces my view that there is likely no getting away from all of the particulars of your employment history.  In my opinion, you are always much better off controlling the delivery of how your job history is discovered by having a detailed chronology.  The alternative is leaving a recruiter or potential employer up to their own devices to fill in the gaps.  Most folks prefer getting the information at the outset than searching for it in cyberspace.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Very very temporary?

I recently had a conversation with someone who didn’t want to add a contract position to their resume.  I am of the opinion that all positions, including contract positions, MUST be on the resume.  This lawyer disagreed.  She felt that because the position was brief, she hated it, and the work was so unlikely to create a future conflict it was unnecessary to put it on the resume.

I get what she’s saying–especially because a firm may view contract positions negatively, a short contract position seems like a likely candidate to fall off the resume.  Even so, I think it absolutely has to be on CV.  The truth is that partners and administrators at law firms will view it differently, but there are plenty of folks who will view the omission of ANY job, no matter how brief, as lying on one’s resume.  Certainly this is one side of the spectrum, but that’s the side I think it’s prudent to cater to.  If, during an interview, your conversation gets derailed explaining that you worked somewhere and then why you didn’t include it on the resume, I think it’s unlikely that the meeting will end on a positive note.  You’ve just caused a distraction–a distraction from the firm thinking about anything other than what a good job you’d do if they hired you.

I know it’s boring and conservative, this 100% disclosure and writing a resume to appeal to the most meticulous of hiring professional.  As time consuming as a job search can be, I promise it’s more time consuming to back-track over your rationale for omitting a job from your resume–and potentially will completely derail your efforts.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Don’t Rely on your Acting Skills

Here in the Midwest, the economy is improving (finally!) and we are seeing more and more opportunities.  This is great news, but it doesn’t necessarily follow that the job offers are going to start pouring in.  The competition for the jobs is brutal, and there are some pretty fantastic candidates out there competing for a relatively small number of positions.  Consequently, when interviewing for a job, you need to be fully prepared and engaged in the position, firm and process.  Without this focus, there is almost no chance that you will secure the position.  That is, unless you are a professionally trained actor.

The other day, I was preparing a candidate for an interview.  The firm with which he was interviewing was a great one:  strong reputation with solid work and a collegial atmosphere.  The position, on the other hand, was not a perfect fit for him.  This candidate began his career in commercial litigation, and after four years of practice moved into white collar crime before being laid off for economic reasons.  The current position was for a commercial litigation associate, and while my candidate had the requisite skills and experience (and expressed interest in applying to the job), I was having a hard time preparing him for the interview.  It seemed like he had a dull, almost apathetic response for every question I asked him, after which he’d say something like “in the interview, I’ll be more enthusiastic,” a statement I have learned not to trust.

After a few minutes of this painful question and answer session, I finally stopped and said something like “why are we wasting your time and mine on this interview if it’s clear that you don’t want the job?”  To which he replied “because I don’t have a job and I need one.”

I get it.  When unemployed, it is best to keep an open mind and apply for positions even if they do not appear to be the exact fit.  But, needing a job, without other reasons, does not qualify as a good enough reason for wanting the position.  If a candidate is going to bother with this process (especially if he is using a recruiter), he should be interested in enough to be able to sincerely state why he wants the job and why he would be the best choice for the position.  My candidate was expecting to rely on his acting skills for the interview and planned to throw out a couple of generic reasons for wanting the position.

Simply put, his plan was a recipe for failure.  In order to have any chance of getting a callback interview, my candidate needed to have some sincere reasons for wanting the job.  So, I spent the next half hour breaking apart the job, the firm and the opportunity in order to help him to see that there were things about the job that were very attractive to him.  There was tremendous opportunity for growth and business development, and the firm did a little white collar crime, so there was hope that in the future, my candidate might be able to partake in that work.  By the end of the prep session, my candidate could actually answer the questions I posed with a little bit of sincerity, energy and (almost) excitement.

It wasn’t an easy process, but I am pretty sure that it helped him secure the callback interview he has next week.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Go ahead and take that imperfect job

Let me start by saying that I get it:  the economy is bad and finding work can feel next to impossible, even if you have phenomenal experience, great academic credentials and have worked at some of the best firms in town.  Having said that, I have to admit that I am little surprised at the lack of flexibility I am seeing in some of my candidates.  The days of being recruited by firms and having multiple offers from which to choose is gone (that is not to say that it won’t come back, but for now, it is a thing of the past).  Jobs are few and far between, and firms can choose from the best of the best.  One would think that in light of the small number of jobs out there as compared to the number of out-of-work attorneys, said out-of-work attorneys would not complain about a job offer that is less than “ideal.”  Apparently, this assumption is completely wrong.

Take a corporate associate with whom I am currently working.  Nice individual, very smart, with great credentials.  She was at the top of her game before the market crashed, but when it did, she was laid off by her AmLaw 10 firm.  That was 10 months ago, and she is still not employed.  Even so, it seems like every time I call her with an opportunity, something about the opportunity just isn’t “right.”  The firm doesn’t pay enough; it’s located in the suburbs rather than right downtown; the position is too focused on finance (an area she has experience in but does not particularly enjoy).

As I said above, I get it.  It really sucks to be out of work, especially when you previously had an untarnished record of getting into the best schools and top law firms.  But the fact remains that this economy does not support the “perfect job.”  Firms are going to pay less, and the jobs that exist are going to be otherwise flawed.  But, that does not mean that you, Ms. Unemployed, should reject every opportunity that comes your way.  We all have to make sacrifices, and if that means driving to the ‘burbs or making 15% less than you would have back when salaries were inflated, then so be it.  At least you will be employed, and I can almost guarantee that if you put up with some of the flaws of the job, when things improve, many of those flaws will disappear.  Salaries will go up again, and more work will come through the door, thereby allowing you to choose projects that are a little more interesting to you.  Hell, when times are good, some suburban firms might even open an office in the city, and if you have put in your time, you might be able to help establish the new office.

I guess what I am trying to say is suck it up while the economy still stinks, and as it improves, so will your job.  That is, if you are willing to accept one that is not perfect.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

The Boutique Alternative

Undoubtedly, most of my conversations with candidates involve whether or not they will be able to find a job in 2010 — and how today’s market compares to 2009/2008.  The going commentary is that the first 8 weeks of 2010 have been markedly more active than 2009 (which was essentially a flat-line on the associate hiring side of the coin).  While this bit of information should lift some eyebrows and produce chants of joy, I find more and more candidates have become disillusioned with the job market and disgruntled with New York Big Law in general — leading to feelings of “leaving the practice,” “moving away,” or “taking time off until Big Law starts hiring again.”

All of this confuses me and here is why:  Big Law is not the only game in town.  That’s a fact!  It’s a fact that bears repeating:  BIG LAW IS NOT THE ONLY GAME IN TOWN.

Big Law occupies only a small percentage of the overall law firm populace.  In fact, outside of that small percentage, you can find boutique firms, middle market firms, small firms, solo practitioners, virtual law practices, and any number of other “opportunities.”  However, people forget this fact, and we all need to be reminded of what truly exists out there.  Granted, it may not be where you saw yourself upon graduating from law school.  However, these often overlooked places offer real jobs, real opportunities, and real experience.

For anyone who grew up in small town America (that would be me) in the late 70s/early 80s when the steel mills were closing, we saw our parents and our friends’ parents lose their pensions and their livelihood when the steel mills shut down.  What else did we see?  We saw those same parents finding other jobs…anywhere they could.  Some left their professional jobs with corporations for solo practices as consultants.  Some left their career-inspired jobs to do free-lance writing or dedicate their 9 to 5 to other income-producing pursuits.  Others stayed in the professional world but in entirely different professional roles.  The bottom line here is that people did whatever they could to keep moving forward, and a little while later when the economy evened out and jobs were hopping again, some of them moved back into the roles they had originally but with different employers.  Some of them enjoyed their new work too much to make a change backward.  All of the above-referenced parents retired with professional accolades and a pension at the end of the day.  A friend of mine described this single-mindedness as follows (and as told to him by his father):  When you don’t know what to do, DO SOMETHING.

What does this mean for lawyers right now?  It means that Big Law isn’t the only game in town, and if Big Law is hiring selectively and slowly right now, that’s okay.  Other opportunities exist so be mindful of them, look for them, interview for them, stay connected, involved, committed to your career.  Be flexible, open-minded, and see yourself in the larger picture.  Hopefully, the legal job market will continue to make careful steps toward improvement and hiring, but, until then, you cannot put your life or career on hold.  As they say, the character of a man or woman is not measured by success, but by adversity.  I believe that to be true, and it also bears repeating.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

What’s wrong with me?

I suppose it’s possible that I haven’t had enough caffeine today, and it’s making me cranky, but after I read this story about the e-mail flame sent by an NYU B-school professor, I found myself siding with the professor.

http://deadspin.com/5477230/nyu-business-school-professor-has-mastered-the-art-of-email-flaming

A student apparently complained to the professor by e-mail–upset that he wasn’t able to attend a class after arriving late–around an hour late.  But, since it was the first class of the semester, and he was visiting all of the course he was considering that met during that time slot, he should have been allowed to sit in on the balance of the first class.

The professor responded by e-mail.  “…get your s**t together.”  The professor challenged his assumptions about whether it was appropriate (even on the first day of classes) to walk in an hour late.  The professor suggested that just because the student couldn’t have known the professor’s policy regarding lateness, he was still expected to conduct himself according to certain standards.  The professor pointed out that though he has no stated policies with respect to urinating on desks, for instance, there is still no tolerance for it.

I sort of hate to admit I come out pro-professor on this one.  His response e-mail was a little harsh–but also right on, in my opinion.  I hate to be such a stickler for decorum, but the professor is right–professionals should be responsible for their behavior and shouldn’t complain about the lack of consideration when they were–admittedly–terribly late.

I received 9 e-mails from lawyers on Saturday asking to be considered for jobs.  Well, 9 resumes attached to e-mails.  One included a brief cover letter that addressed me specifically.  That was nice.  Several just had sentence fragments.  Two had no text whatsoever.  I don’t need a fancy cover letter when potential candidates approach me.  Even so, it is nice to see a concise and pleasant greeting.  “Thank you for your consideration” goes a long way.  I don’t ignore resumes from any potential candidate, but the way a person introduces themselves to me does make a difference in my overall evaluation.  To paraphrase our NYU professor, there are lots of things that are hard to manage in a career.  Politeness and decorum isn’t one of them, so it’s important to get that right.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

The good news and the bad news

The most frequent question I’ve been getting is:  “are things better out there?”

The answer is mixed.  First, there isn’t yet one easy response that applies to all cities, all practices areas, and all lawyers.  For instance, there is good partner level movement–a tremendous amount in fact.  The associate market is changing–which is fantastic–but not quickly and not across the board.

Second, the beginnings of a recovery in the marketplace doesn’t immediately mean that everyone will instantly get re-absorbed into the workforce.  What we see here in New York is a definite upswing in work, which is fantastic news for lots of folks in the legal market.  For example, a lot of firms are doing a tremendous amount of securities work, both transactional and compliance, and our current needs reflect that trend.  The bad news is that the hiring higher-ups have their pulse on the market, and they suspect that in lateral hiring, they can be particularly choosy.

And they are.

The changes in the marketplace are not so simple as whether the economy is failing or whether it’s in recovery.  We are still in an environment where those with the ability to hire new lawyers are testing the market to see the type of the talent they can get.  How selective a firm can be will change depending on how much competition they have in the market.  As the overall work-flow increases in a particular practice and region, job opportunities will expand more meaningfully.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

10 Questions to Ask Your Headhunter

My name is Dan Binstock and I’m a legal recruiter in Washington, D.C. As my first post, I wanted to link to an article that appeared in the Legal Times in November 2006.

If you are thinking of using a legal recruiter, this is one of the most important decisions you can make regarding your career.

Legal recruiters (especially in large cities like Washington, D.C.) come in all shapes, sizes, experience levels, ethics, backgrounds, etc. It is always quite shocking how little most attorneys really know about how legal recruiters work, and how little effort is usually put into researching and vetting the potential recruiter.

And I am not casting judgment, as I speak from personal experience.

When I was practicing in a large firm, I received cold calls all the time. I remember receiving a phone call from a headhunter that happened to catch my attention regarding one position. I was under the mistaken impression that just because this recruiter cold called me that she was the only person working on the search (which, in truth, was hardly the case). This was just one of the many things I was in the dark about when it came to working with legal search firms.

This article will help shed some light on the mysterious world of legal recruiting, and will arm you with some questions to ask to ensure that you are able to choose the best person to assist you. Here’s the link: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1162548320507.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.