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.

How to Select the Best Legal Recruiter and Maximize the Effectiveness of Working with One

INTRODUCTION

One of the most misunderstood facets of the legal recruiting industry is the following: You have many options when choosing a legal recruiter (not just the one that cold-called you), and how well you work with your legal recruiter will directly influence how successful the legal recruiter is in working with you.

If you have ever spent any serious time in Hollywood, you have undoubtedly come across numerous people with agents. When you speak to some people with agents, they often talk about things they told their agents:

“I told my agent I do not like this kind of part because of X.”
“My agent says that if I wait about six months, a part with X may open up.”
“My agent knows my personal obligations and is not going to allow me to work with X director because he is too demanding.”

Similarly, the more time you spend with someone with an agent, the more you realize that he or she is communicating with that agent all the time. Frankly, if any of these people with agents are your friends, it can get pretty annoying. Their cell phones are ringing during lunch with calls from the agents. They need to call their agents during a night out–and so on. If you go to any social function with your friends who have agents, the agents are very likely to be there talking to their clients.

The reason we tell you all of this is that in the entertainment industry, the people with agents have figured out that the more they communicate with their agents, the more likely they will find their perfect match to advance their careers. But it is not all work. The client and agent also establish a working and friendly relationship where the agents constantly know about what is going on with their clients, both personally and professionally.

In the legal industry, there are a few select attorneys (less than 1%) whose skills are so good that they need agents–just like famous actors and actresses do. Admittedly, the legal recruiting industry is much different from Hollywood; however, in both cases the agents and legal recruiters are working with people who, if they are not stars, have a tremendous amount of potential. The job of a legal recruiter is to sell your potential to law firms.

If you have worked with a recruiter in the past, you likely have a pretty good idea of how the process works. If you haven’t yet worked with a recruiter, the idea of “placing your career in somebody’s hands” may seem rather daunting and scary. Regardless of which category you fall into, it is important to know that if you are able to use a legal recruiter, our goals are the same -to help you get a job where you and the firm will both be happy. In this regard, here are some ways you can ensure that you choose the best recruiter and ensure that you maximize the effectiveness of working with your recruiter.

1. HOW TO SELECT THE BEST LEGAL RECRUITER FOR YOUR NEEDS

You do not need to use the first recruiter who calls you. There are a plethora of recruiters to choose from regarding your search for a better opportunity. And all are not created equal. We are amazed by how often attorneys decide to place their careers in a virtually unknown recruiter’s hands just because a particular recruiter was the first to cold call them about an opportunity. Often, when we ask attorneys the names of their former recruiters, they frequently respond to the effect of, “I don’t even remember the person’s name” or “I only spoke to the person once, and they forwarded my resume to a bunch of places, and I never heard back from them.”

It is important to realize that just because a particular recruiter calls you, it does not mean that he or she is the only person working on the search for a law firm. Unless the recruiter has an “exclusive” on the search, it is likely that numerous recruiters are working on the search, and you definitely have a choice as to whom you want to work with. Similar to buying a house, you do not need to work with the first real estate agent whom you come in contact with. And feel free to “interview” multiple recruiters as well.

How do you determine the best legal recruiter for you? Now that you understand that there are numerous options when choosing a recruiter, here are some things you should consider.

First, do you feel comfortable speaking to the recruiter about your ideal job and career dreams? Do you feel that the recruiter is interested in getting to know you and your most important priorities, or is the recruiter merely trying to “sell” you on the particular job he or she is calling about?

Second, is the recruiter reputable? Is the recruiter with an established company that you can easily research? Can you research the individual recruiter’s educational and professional background?

Third, does the recruiter spend a significant amount of his or her practice “cold calling?” This is an important consideration for the following reason. If a recruiter cold calls attorneys all day, this recruiter must have certain firms that he or she “places in” and some that he or she “calls into.” Firms will not work with recruiters that cold call into them because this is considered “double dipping” and is highly frowned upon. Thus, if a recruiter calls into half of the firms in a city (and these firms are obviously not firms that the recruiter can make placements in), the recruiter has access to only half of the opportunities in the given city. On the other hand, if the recruiter does not spend much time cold calling and works off of referrals or candidates initiating contact, this recruiter will have access to many more opportunities.

Fourth, if you are searching in a particular region of the country, be sure to confirm that the recruiter has experience working in this region. For example, if you are moving from New York to Charlotte, most likely the New York recruiter is focused on the tri-state region, while the recruiter who is based in the southeast region will have a much better idea of what jobs are available in the specific market. Indeed, law firms seem to have preferences working with recruiters that are either based in their geographic region or have a lot of experience working with attorneys in their particular regions. This is because law firms appreciate developing long-term, productive relationships with recruiters. Given the significant amount of time it takes to monitor opportunities and develop relationships with law firms, it is literally impossible for a single recruiter to be able to cover the entire nation. If a recruiter suggests that he or she can cover the entire nation, don’t walk, RUN, for the hills.

Fifth, a referral from a fellow attorney is a great way to find a recruiter. If somebody you know and trust has had a positive experience with a particular recruiter in the past, this fact should be given substantial weight.

Candidates who work with one recruiter typically have the most success and the least chance of getting “bounced” as a result of dual submissions. While you are certainly free to use as many recruiters as you want, and it may seem tempting to have several different recruiters “cover the market,” it is common knowledge in the industry that candidates who work with one recruiter have an overwhelmingly higher rate of success than those that use several recruiters.

There are some definite benefits of working with just one recruiter. As an initial matter, working with one recruiter eliminates the possibility of a “double submission.” More often than you’d like to think, attorneys who use multiple recruiters often do not keep the best notes or records of where they have applied in the past six months. (The six-month period is the industry standard for determining who has “priority.” In other words, if you or a recruiter submitted your materials to a firm on January 1st, another recruiter should not submit you to that same firm until, at the least, June 1st).

In these situations, there is a heightened risk that you may inadvertently authorize two recruiters to submit you to the same firm within a six-month period. If this happens, even if you have stellar credentials and your experience is right on target, a firm will reject you for two reasons. First, the firm will do anything to avoid getting into a fee dispute with two separate recruiting companies and will find it much easier to reject the candidate (remember, this same rationale applies if you apply to a firm directly on your own and then to the same firm through a recruiter within a six-month period). Also, if a submission is received from two different sources, it sends the signal that the candidate is either unorganized or somewhat desperate for a job.

Furthermore, working with one recruiter allows you to have a consistent coach, confidant, and cheerleader in your corner at all times and one who can help keep you “on track” in light of your stated goals and priorities. We have also found that you will likely feel more comfortable “opening up” and providing a greater deal of information if you have a solid relationship with one recruiter. We urge you not to underestimate this point as it is crucial to the process.

Here’s an important example: if a recruiter knows about all of your different interviews, he or she can often use the information to generate and maintain interest from various firms. Furthermore, firms are more likely to actively pursue a candidate when a recruiter appears to have thoroughly screened the candidate and is fully aware of the ins and outs of a candidate’s situation.

In short, like an agent, the more information a recruiter has, the better he or she is able to expertly “survey” your job landscape, keep you on track, and effectively manage and coordinate your search with you to make sure it is as smooth as possible and attains your career goals.

Once you have selected a recruiter, what should he/she be doing to assist with your search? The recruiter you work with should always write a detailed cover letter on your behalf to the firms. The cover letter should discuss, at a minimum:

• Why you are considering a move;
• Your interest in the specific firm;
• Your academic achievements;
• A highly detailed description of your work experience (which goes beyond what is merely in your resume);
• Why you have made certain job changes in the past, with provided explanations;
• Any special accolades or characteristics that may set you apart from your peers; and
• Any other relevant personal information.

We strongly believe that one of the biggest advantages of using a recruiter is that a recruiter can tell your story in a unique way, brag on your behalf (without you appearing conceited), and–most of all–answer any questions that somebody reviewing your resume might have at first blush (e.g., Why is the person looking? Why did he/she leave the last job after only one year? Why did he/she get two Cs during the last semester of law school?). In fact, we feel so strongly that a comprehensive cover letter is crucial to your candidacy that we do not present any candidate without at least a several-page cover letter.

Many recruiting coordinators have privately confessed that they routinely reject candidates when their submissions do not have explanations about certain potential “yellow flags.” Often, a mere explanation can make all the difference. In the words of one recruiting coordinator at a very well-regarded firm, “It is amazing how, when we have so many resumes and need to narrow our pile, we just reject flat-out those candidates that don’t have explanations for all our questions and interview those that do.”

Importantly, telling your story verbally does little to help your candidacy in the long run. Although the recruiting coordinator or one partner may have the explanation, odds are that the other 5 or 6 people reviewing your resume will not be privy to the same explanation and could easily draw adverse conclusions because of their lack of information.

Many recruiters, unfortunately, are focused primarily on sending out as many submissions as possible to increase their individual chances of making just one placement and, therefore, spend a minimum amount of time on submissions. If a recruiter merely emails or faxes a resume to a firm with little or no background information, you are losing out on perhaps the biggest advantage of using a recruiter. In those cases, you would likely be better off just sending your resume yourself.

Lastly, your recruiter should ask you for a deal sheet or significant transactions sheet if you are a corporate, securities, real estate, or tax attorney. If you are a litigator, you should provide the recruiter with a couple of writing samples. The recruiter should have examples of deal sheets, depending on your practice area, to assist with your detailed transaction list. The writing sample should be something recent and almost entirely your own work product. After you have done a full read through on your writing samples, your recruiter should offer to read your writing sample before he/she submits you to the firm. We have found that about 90% of the candidates who submit writing samples have at least one typo. That grammatical error or spelling mistake can make or break your candidacy with a firm when you are competing against another attorney of equal qualifications, personality, and experience. It also helps to have a recruiter who either was a former attorney or has worked in a law firm review your writing sample or review your deal sheet. These individuals are most familiar with the work product that partners and associates are interested in reviewing and will understand, if applicable, how to make your deal sheet or writing sample better.

2. NOW THAT YOU HAVE THE RIGHT RECRUITER, HERE ARE SOME WAYS YOU CAN MAXIMIZE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THAT RECRUITER

Help us get to know you, not only as an attorney, but as a person. We strongly believe that the better we know you, the more effective we are in helping with your needs. As recruiters, we came into this profession because we love working with and helping people. Almost all of our recruiters are attorneys who left practicing law because they simply preferred talking to fellow attorneys about their careers and issues that were more personal in nature. Talking to people is our passion, and if it weren’t, we would not be able to spend hours upon hours speaking to and helping you with one of the most important transitions in your life. While we certainly need to know your “professional story” (e.g., why you are looking for a new position, your professional experience, etc.), we enjoy getting to know you as a person as well. For example, what do you like the most in your practice? The least? Why did you decided to practice law? Why are you continuing to practice law? Who is your inspiration? Were you the first person in your family to attend law school? What makes you unique? Is there anything else going on in your life that will affect your search? What is the biggest challenge you are facing in your career? This deeper level of communication is extremely helpful for us.

If possible, try to meet your recruiter in person. If you are in the same city as your recruiter, meeting face to face–whether for a cup of coffee or in the office for a more formal meeting–can only help the process. We find that meeting our candidates in person is much more conducive to developing a stronger, more trusting, and overall more successful relationship that yields more positive results.

Information that you think hurts you may not always be as bad as you think. Candidates are often surprised to learn that what they believe are “deal-breaking black marks” on their resumes may be more common than they think and can often be explained to the firm’s satisfaction once we are able to hear the story and learn the truth of the entire situation. The worst thing a candidate can do is try to withhold or omit important information because, in accordance with Murphy’s Law, the information will eventually be found out, and the damage caused from withholding of the information is often much greater than the damage that would have been caused by simply providing the information up front.

It is OK to brag about yourself. One of the significant advantages about using a recruiter is that a recruiter can showcase and brag about you in ways that you can’t. Although you may feel slightly uncomfortable if we ask you to highlight your achievements and all the positive things you’ve done, this type of information gives us the tools to highlight your key strengths to law firms. Tell us about all the positive praise and comments you’ve received, show us all of your letters of recommendation, tell us about all your achievements and all those other things that make you secretly so proud. Don’t worry, we won’t think you’re conceited, and the firms will appreciate having this information.

The more we know about your entire job search–including where you have applied in the past–the better we will be able to help you. One of the first questions we ask our candidates is, “Where have you applied in the past six months?” There are several reasons we ask this important question. First, as noted above, we want to be absolutely sure to steer clear of any firms you have already contacted directly within the past six months.

We’ve seen candidates who feel hesitant to let us know that they may be looking for jobs in several cities at once or that they have already applied to several firms on their own or through another recruiter. Don’t worry about it. We know that there are many different options when it comes to a job search, and we have been in your shoes ourselves. Letting us know everywhere you have previously applied (for at least the past six months), however, will help ensure that we do not submit you to a firm where you have already applied. In short, the more information we have about your situation, the better we are able to help you through the process.

Take advantage of your expertise and be open and honest with us. We are experts in helping attorneys find jobs. We love to answer questions and provide guidance. While you are busy writing briefs, we are researching the market. Take advantage of what we know and what we can share with you. Don’t be afraid to ask questions you may think are obvious.

Also, if you have certain specific expectations that are important to you, let us know. And if we are not meeting your expectations in any way, please let us know that as well. Working with a recruiter is a two-way relationship. It requires open communication, honesty, and clearly defined expectations.

Stay in contact with your recruiter. Your job search is an extremely important time for you. When you are working with a legal recruiter, everything about what the legal recruiter is doing for you is about you. In addition, your job search is an important life event for you. Because you are in the midst of an important life event, it is important that you are communicating with your legal recruiter at all times.

Many candidates sit around and wait for their recruiters to contact them. While no one likes to be bothered unnecessarily, you need to realize that your legal recruiter works for you. Because your legal recruiter works for you, it is important that you provide your recruiters the direction they need in order to do their jobs as effectively as possible. In most cases, this will mean letting the recruiter know what you are feeling and thinking about your job search at all times.

Most of our recruiters work extremely hard. In fact, the substantial majority of our recruiters work between 10 and 12 hours a day. While our recruiters devote time to all of their candidates, candidates with more pronounced immediate needs are generally where the recruiters will put the majority of their time first. What this means, however, is that a recruiter must know the urgency of your particular job search.

As recruiters, we have worked with numerous types of candidates. Some candidates may decide they are not in a hurry to move but will consider a better offer if it comes along. Other candidates are in a hurry to move and want to get out of their present employment situation immediately. Some candidates are in between. For your recruiters to do their jobs as effectively as possible, it is important that you stay in touch with them and let them know precisely what is going on with your particular situation, such as your desire to pursue more firms, for example. Legal recruiters are not mind readers and may need to be prodded at times, especially if your job search increases in urgency.

Respect your legal recruiter. Attorneys have different views of legal recruiters. Some attorneys realize and understand that legal recruiting at its very highest level is something that merits a great deal of respect. Other attorneys have different views of legal recruiters based on prior bad experiences. While the point of this article is not to convince you that legal recruiting is a serious profession, you do need to understand that it is important that you respect your legal recruiter. Your legal recruiter is in an advisory role that will have an impact over the course of your career.

Throughout the years, we have seen numerous types of personalities of different attorneys. We would estimate that more than 95% of the attorneys we have worked with have been absolute pleasures to work with. However, occasionally, the rare personality comes along that will lie, withhold important information, or even be blatantly disrespectful. The same rules of decorum that govern your other professional relationships should also apply to your relationship with your legal recruiter, if for nothing else, because it works to your advantage. When you respect your legal recruiter, he/she will feel empowered to exert a great deal of effort on your behalf and enjoy doing so. No one likes to feel disrespected, and this includes your legal recruiter as well.

It is important to do what you say you are going to do and say what you mean. Every time a legal recruiter takes on a new candidate and submits a candidate to a law firm, the legal recruiter’s credibility is on the line with the law firm it is submitting you to.

Most of our legal recruiters are speaking with law firms in major cities on a daily basis. When the legal recruiter is representing you, his/her job is to assist firms along in making hiring decisions. Accordingly, positive information you may share with your legal recruiter about a given firm or interview will likely be passed along to the law firm. If you are not telling the truth about this sort of thing, you risk harming the credibility of your legal recruiter.

In addition, if you go into your job search with the objective of achieving a certain result and decide later that you no longer want that result, you should share this information with your recruiter so that your recruiter’s credibility is not unnecessarily harmed.

Conclusion
Now that you know how to choose the best legal recruiter for your needs and how to maximize the effectiveness of working with that recruiter, you should be confident that your chances of landing your next position will increase significantly. Good luck!

Do Law Firms Generally Have Hiring Freezes During the Holiday Season, or is This as Good a Time as Any to Aggressively Pursue a New Job?

Do law firms generally have hiring freezes during the holiday season, or is this as good a time as any to aggressively pursue a new job?

Law firms generally do not have hiring freezes during the holidays, although many do wait to see what their needs are in January. That being said, we have found the holiday period to be a wonderful time to find a new position, as there are always a number of immediate openings with very few candidates applying. There is less competition during the holiday season, and firms are more likely to move quickly on a candidate’s application. Furthermore, it is best to get yourself out in the market during the slower season so that as soon as the firm has an immediate opening that is not yet advertised, they can call you!

How to Handle Counter Offers

My current firm is loathe to let go of me. When I went to the partner in charge of my practice group to ask for a reference for my job search, he offered to match the salary that any firm offers me. How should I handle this?

Well, there are many things to consider when weighing multiple offers - and you should look at what the partner at your current firm said as a job offer equivalent to what you are receiving on the job market. First and foremost, you will have to consider why you wanted to leave your current firm in the first place. If you were just testing the market to see how much you were worth and stumbled upon something exciting, then chances are you were not necessarily unhappy with your current situation, and this may not be that big of an issue. However, if you were leaving because the hours are too long, the work is too boring, or the partner wants to keep you around because he really would miss directing his tyranny at you, then there is not much of a choice to be made. Since you are asking this question, however, I doubt that you are extremely unhappy here. If you are, though, don’t let this extremely flattering gesture cloud your thinking.

In terms of your long term career, there are many advantages of sticking it out at your old job, especially if you are going to be equally compensated. First, if they like you enough to make a matching offer, then they will probably treat you pretty well if you decide to stay, maybe even let you sneak out of the office before 8 pm on a Friday night. If you leave your firm, you will be starting over and you will have to prove yourself yet again, and since you have already made a great impression at your current firm, maybe that isn’t something you want to have to do again. Second, it sounds like you have an excellent chance of making partner at this firm if they are that interested in keeping you. In case you are under the impression that your firm does this with all of their associates who try to leave, let me clear that up without knowing anything about your firm - they definitely don’t. This is extremely unorthodox. Third, if you eventually do want to leave this firm, the more time you spend in one location will make your resume stronger than if you continually are moving around.

The advantages of moving to a new firm depend entirely on the firm you are considering. A more prestigious firm is always a lure with attorneys and can be a good career move for the long term, as well. A change of scenery and a change of the type of work you are doing are some other reasons why moving might be a good idea. One of the main reasons that another firm’s offer could be more enticing than your current firm’s is that at a new firm, you can remold your image. As previously discussed, having to reprove yourself can be awfully tedious, but if what you really seek is to make it so they don’t expect the same things of you (e.g. your willingness to handle grunt work without complaining, your willingness to work national holidays, etc.), then moving firms may be your only option.

Either way, you clearly have a lot to think about. The most important consideration, though, is whether or not more money is what you were after in the first place. If not, then you should most likely not consider your current firm’s offer at all.

Factors to Consider while Evaluating an Offer

You’ve spent the last few months updating your resume, working with your recruiter, evaluating firms, and interviewing. Finally, all of the hard work has paid off and what you have been waiting for has arrived: the offer. However, while you may feel a sense of relief, accomplishment, and happiness, you may also feel a sense of anxiety and uncertainty. This is a serious decision to make, and before making it, you should weigh certain factors carefully.

Each of us, of course, is different, and determining what factors are important may vary greatly, depending on the individual. You may attempt to negotiate a higher salary, additional vacation time, and better health benefits. However, these items are often part of a standard package determined by the firm’s compensation structure, and you may or may not be able to effectively negotiate them. In addition, other factors, such as a firm’s “culture,” are also unlikely to change. Determining whether you can accept the offer and the firm for what they are can tend to be as difficult a decision as any you will have to make during your job search. The following factors should be considered when deciding whether or not to accept an offer.

Compensation
Even if money isn’t what gives you the most job satisfaction, no one can argue its importance. Most of us want to make sure we are being paid what we’re worth and what the going rate is for jobs similar to ours. This is where your recruiter can be of invaluable assistance. Your recruiter can provide you with information as to whether the offer is in step with the firm’s compensation structure, negotiate on your behalf when appropriate, and provide you with information on how your offer compares to what others are making at the same level, in the same practice area, in firms of similar size and status, and in the same geographic region.

Firm Culture
Every firm possesses a culture which can range from the traditional and conservative to the entrepreneurial and liberal. This is where the impressions that you formed during your interview will help you determine whether the particular firm environment is right for you. Were people talking to each other when you walked the halls? Were the doors closed or open? Was the staff treated with respect? How did the partners and associates interact with each other? How formal or informal was the interview? How did people dress? Was the office decorated in traditional oak panels, dull colors, or was it modern, with bright art and lights? Finding an environment that reflects not only your personality, but also your ability to effectively develop professionally is a key element in your future success as an attorney. Certainly, many attorneys can be happy and thrive personally and professional in completely different environments. What you need to determine is what environment would be the right fit for you.

Sharing a Common Goal
Firm culture also comprises other factors, including shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that characterize a firm. If you value your time away from the office, a firm with a high billable requirement that consistently requires late hours and weekend sessions may not be right for you. On the other hand, the type of work you seek, the mentoring you require, the opportunities for growth, and the sophistication of the practice may also translate directly into more hours spent at the office. What you need to determine is whether this is a firm that shares your values, goals, and ambitions.

Fitting In
Another factor that you should focus on is whether the people you met when you interviewed with the firm are the type of people you want to work with. You are going to be spending a great deal of time at the office, working very closely with your colleagues, and the ability to get along with them may be critical to your success. The interview will provide you with insight to help you make that determination. This is also where you may want to consult with your recruiter to provide you with additional information about the firm and its particular practice groups. Networking can also be useful, and you may want to call your list of contacts and gather additional information about the firm.

Each of these factors taken alone may not make or break your decision to accept or decline a job offer. Moreover, these are but a few factors to consider when making a decision. You may also need to consider additional factors that are particularly relevant to your job search. Whether you choose to accept or reject a job offer, you should first inform your recruiter about your decision, and discuss these and other factors with your recruiter directly. Then, you should contact the employer who made that offer in a timely fashion. Your rejection or acceptance should be done formally, in writing, as well as by telephone. The legal community is a small one, and you may at some point develop a relationship with that employer albeit as a superior, a colleague, a client, or even your next-door neighbor. Therefore, irrespective of your decision, one of the most important things you should consider when mulling over a job offer is the importance of safeguarding the relationships that were created during this process.

See Opportunities Where Others See Obstacles

If you are looking for a job then one of the most important things you can do is see opportunities where others see huge obstacles.  Most of the world sees huge obstacles to everything.  There are always obstacles to anyone and everyone doing the absolute best that can be done at something.  If you want to get the best possible job and go as far as possible in your career then you need to insure that you are not seeing obstacles and that every obstacle you see is, in fact, an opportunity.  When you look at the lives of people who have done exceptionally well in the law and in most fields you will generally find that they see opportunities where most of us see obstacles.

George McGovern was nominated by the Democratic convention in 1972 as a candidate to run against Richard Nixon.  In the midst of the convention, McGovern decided that he no longer wanted Senator Eagleton to be his vice-presidential running mate. At the time there were thousands of bumper stickers and pins that had been made up that said “McGovern-Eagleton”.  A young sixteen-year-old entrepreneur bought up approximately 5,000 of these buttons and stickers for around 5-cents each.  Within a short time the same entrepreneur sold individual buttons and stickers as historical memorabilia for as much as $25 each.  The person’s name?  Bill Gates.

People like Bill Gates have massive lessons to teach the world because they can see opportunities where others may simply see obstacles.  In order to do well in a job search you absolutely need to make sure you are looking out for where the opportunities are to succeed.

“I did not go to the right school”
This is ridiculous.  Most of the highest paid attorneys in the United States did not go to good schools either.  In fact, the very, very highest paid attorneys may have barely made it through law school.  What these attorneys did is they focused on their strengths and made the absolute most they could of them.

The law school you went to simply does not matter.  Yes, the law school you went to may hold some importance for the very highest paying law firms; however, for the most part your law school should be looked upon as a positive.

If you went to a terrible law school, find people who also went to this law school and connect with them.  Find the most successful attorneys and learn from them and ask them all sorts of questions about how they overcame the law school they went to.  Send them letters thanking them for the lessons they taught you.  Incorporate what they told you. Work hard to overcome what you may lack in an exceptional school pedigree by working on your personality, reading books about how to bring in business, making sure you work harder on your legal skills than someone else does.

Nothing is more common than people who go to a good law school and believe based on this that they can stop trying harder.  The best thing that ever happened to me personally was not getting into a certain ivy league school my father and a lot of my family went to.  This taught me right then and there that I could never rest on my laurels and needed to keep working and working.  Not getting into that school was probably the best thing that ever happened to me.  People who go to the best schools often believe they can simply rest on their laurels due to that one achievement.

If you did not go to the best school then realize that while those who may have gone to a better school may rest on their laurels you are going to keep working on yourself and getting better and better.  You will surpass them and when you do they will not even have seen you coming and you will not need to look back.

“I do not have the right experience”
Regardless of the experience you have, you have some experience doing something.  The experience excuse is crazy to me.  Everyone has experience!

Maybe you used to work in an oil field as a roughneck and put yourself through night law school.  You then could then use you knowledge and connection to oil workers to connect with people injured in accidents in oil fields and then represent them.

Regardless of your experience, there is some sort of experience you have that you can put to use to get the position you want.  You need to think of what you have done that is related to what you want to do. You need to connect with others in the law who have had similar experiences to you.

Perhaps, however, you truly do not have any experience which is relevant to what you want to do.  I doubt this-however, it is possible.  If this is the case then the way to look at this is to take the experience you do have as something that is a fantastic lesson that you need to find ways to get the experience you want to get the sort of position you want.  This may mean taking on a given responsibility in your current job, or seeking out new sorts of work.  Whatever you are seeking to do, you can get the experience.

For example, one of the most attractive things to potential employers is when someone is so serious about doing something that they have taken classes, volunteered, or done something extraordinary to the experience that they need in order to do a job.  People (naturally) want to assist those who are trying hard to advance.

“I live in the wrong part of the country”
Regardless of where you live in the United States there is tons of legal work to be done-and the sort of legal work you want to do.  The belief that you cannot get a job because of where you live is completely fallacious.

One of the most important abilities of anyone-in any profession—is the ability to create work.  Very good lawyers are experts at creating work for themselves and are constantly doing it and able to create this work.

Imagine, for example, you are in a small rural town and want to practice patent law.  You could find local inventors and get to know them and also ask them for referrals.  You could also put up a website.  You could write attorneys in other small law firms around the country for work.  The list of possibilities is endless.  In order to get the work you need you do need to find opportunities and you can find them wherever you are.

One of the secrets of selling anything is you need to put people in pain by identifying a need they may have that they did not know they had.  This is something you can do quite easily once you adopt the mindset of seeing the sorts of work people are likely to need done.  If you see an inventor discussing something he is working on you could go up to him and say “Are you crazy?  You need to patent this before you talk about it!”  A solid and good attorney is always creating demand and finding ways to get work no matter where they are.

In a small town this could be traveling to other towns and giving talks.  This could be speaking with local organization.  There are tons of ways that people can get business.  You simply need to insure that you are making the most of each opportunity you have to get the work you want.  It does not matter where you are-you can do anything if you try hard enough.

“I do not have the right personality to fit in”
Then change your personality-or better yet, do not change your personality.

I remember listening to a lawyer talk about business generation once and hearing him say that the biggest nerd in Los Angeles was also the biggest business generator.  That is to day: Just be who you are-it is probably good enough.

Everyone fits in wherever they are because there are a variety of people everywhere.  You need to look for reasons why you fit in.

“I have a learning disability”
Incredibly, I heard an attorney say this once and use this as a reason for not succeeding.  You know what this guy did?  He found a job representing foreigners who did not speak English and they never caught on that he was not the sharpest tack around.  This guy is having more fun and making more money than the majority of attorneys out there.  And while the work he is doing is not that difficult, he is charging a fair price for it and doing good work.

“My grades were not good enough in law school”
Who cares.  I know someone who got a “C-” average at a mediocre law school who got a clerkship with a Federal Appellate Judge and also got a job at a firm routinely ranked as one of the top 10 most prestigious firms in the United States.  The judge and firm never asked for her grades!  Then I placed the same girl at an AmLaw 20 firm and the firm that hired her never asked for her grades either.  To answer your suspicions, this girl was no “knockout”.  She just got lucky.  You can too.  Lots of attorneys do.  The secret is applying to as many jobs as possible and looking the part.  In this girl’s case she had written herself onto the law review at her school and was also elected managing editor.

“The Best Recruiters Will Not Work With Me” Who cares.  I do not have as an exciting life as a rock star.  There are lots of things you could have that you do not.  If the best recruiters will not work with you then find a job on your own.  There are some easy places you can find opportunities when you are seeking for a job regardless of whether or not you use a recruiter:

LawCrossing.  Yes, I am the founder of LawCrossing.  Yes, LawCrossing costs money each month.  Nevertheless, LawCrossing does have over 250 people working for it looking for jobs for you each day.  It has a multimillion dollar database that searches every legal employer’s website daily and the people at LawCrossing also do a ton of this work manually as well.  LawCrossing also searches literally thousands of newspapers around the United States each day in search of jobs.  LawCrossing is an excellent way to put hundreds of people to work for you finding opportunities.  The fact that many people do not want to pay the nominal amount this service charges is fine. Those are the same people who are not competing with LawCrossing members for jobs!

Legal Authority.  Yes, I am also the Founder of Legal Authority.  I happen to really believe in the service and am quite passionate about it.  Legal Authority is probably the most effective method of finding a position out there.  With Legal Authority you can literally apply to all of the firms of a size you choose and in a interested in practicing litigation in Aurora, Illinois with a firm of less than 10 attorneys you can apply to all of these firms at one time.  The benefit of practice area you choose in an area you specify.  For example, if you are using a service like this is huge because you will find firms with a need that might not even be advertising.  In addition, as part of the Legal Authority service you will have your resume and cover letter professionally done.  This can make a huge difference when you are applying for jobs

**
Regardless of how you are doing your job search, if you are looking for a position the very last thing you should do is limit the number of places you are applying to.  The more places you are applying to the more opportunities you are likely to get.  You need to look for a position in a comprehensive and far-reaching way.  The more places you apply to the better chance you will have of getting another position. In addition, the employer you are applying to may put you in touch with someone else who does have excellent opportunities.  Insure you are applying to many places at once.

“My resume stinks”  Then make your resume better.  Buy a book about attorney resumes such as one I wrote (Attorney Resume Secrets Revealed available from my company Attorney Research Group (www.attorneyresearchgroup.com)) and make your resume perfect.  Better yet, hire a professional resume service such as Attorney Resume (www.attorneyresume.com) to do your resume (yes, this is also a company I founded).  Set professionals to work on your resume and make your resume outstanding.  You owe it to yourself to get a fantastic resume completed.

Regardless of whether you hire a company like Attorney Resume or work on your resume yourself, you need to get the most professional resume possible done.  A professional can help you bring out your strengths.

Conclusions
The best possible thing you can do with your career is start seeing opportunities where the rest of the world is seeing obstacles.  Even obstacles should be something that you see as actual opportunities.  Do not let the world get you down-take action and improve and go where you want to go.

I firmly believe that you can accomplish whatever you set out to do and to be.  I believe in you and have dedicated my life to providing you with the inspiration and career tools to get to where you want to go.  Take your career to the next level and become who you want to become. Never let any perceived obstacle hold you back.  You deserve better than that.

Should you talk about other interviews in your interview?

One of the questions I receive quite often from attorneys I am working with is whether or not they should talk about other interviews while they are interviewing with a law firm.  Let me emphasize one thing: This is one of the more important questions you will ever be asked in an interview.  Regardless of your qualifications, how you respond to this question will have a direct bearing on whether or not you receive an offer from the law firm asking you this question.  Be very careful as to how you answer this question.

At the outset, it is important to point out that you do not have to answer this question but should.  This question will also often not be asked.  Indeed, it is my opinion that this question is entirely inappropriate.  In no instance should you even volunteer this information unless you are asked. The problem is that if you are asked this question you will look bad if you refuse to answer it.  Not answering the question gives the employer the impression that you will similarly “hide the ball” when you are working for them.  It also does not do much to assist you in establishing a bond of trust, empathy and understanding with potential new employer.  Therefore, it is my opinion that his question must be answered. There are two important rules you must keep in mind when answering this question.

First, you need to understand that most firms are unlikely to give you offers unless they think you are their first choice firm.  There are certainly exceptions when firms make offers to people who they do not think are their first choice law firms.  As a general rule, though, if a firm believes you are their first choice you will be better off.  Because I am a legal recruiter, I see instances all the time when attorneys go to work for law firms that initially were not their first choice.  Many firms are very good at recruiting and can convince most people to join their firm when they extend offers-even in the face of competing offers.  Nevertheless, for the most part a firm wants to believe you are their first choice and this will have a direct bearing the substantial majority of time on whether an offer is extended.

Second, how you justify why you are interviewing with the firms you are interviewing with will also have a direct bearing on whether or not the firm makes you an offer.  In addition to knowing that you are their first choice, law firms also want to know that you are likely to remain with them after joining.  They also want to know why they are the best fit among potentially competing offers.  Furthermore, the law firm wants assurances that it is not making a mistake making an offer to you.  How you justify where else you are interviewing will have a direct impact on your potential success in terms of getting an offer.
1. Before You Ever Tell An Employer Who Else You Are Interviewing With The Firm Must Believe You Are Their First Choice

I have a quick story from personal experience that is related to law firm interviewing-albeit, indirectly.  I am an Area Chair for the admissions office of a major American university in Los Angeles.  In this position, I am largely responsible for ensuring applicants to the University in my area are interviewed.  While I am not the one making the ultimate decisions as to whom the school admits, I do put together reports on everyone I speak with and express my enthusiasm (or lack thereof) for each applicant.  I would have a hard time believing that my reviews do not carry at least some weight in the admissions process.  This year I probably interviewed 50 students for the school.  This school is generally ranked a “Top 10″ American college; however, in some years it is slightly lower.

As is typical of most interviews, I speak with the high school students about their dreams and aspirations for college and ask them why they are interested in attending the University.  Because I also attended the school, I have a decent understanding of the sorts of students that are likely to be happy and fit in well at the school.  This experience is derived largely from personal experience of having attended the school myself.  In my experience, the sorts of students I believe would be a good fit for the school are also the same sorts of students who seem the most enthusiastic to me and give me the most compelling reasons for wanting to attend.

One challenge of these interviews is trying to decide who among a great number of highly qualified individuals really wants to go to the school. If someone is not qualified for the school, my job is easy because I know they will be rejected.  Because the University is a highly ranked school, the majority of students I speak with inevitably are applying to schools like Princeton, Yale and other similarly situated schools.  Accordingly, one of the first questions on my mind is this: Why my school and not another highly ranked one?

This situation is compounded by an obvious fact: While I certainly believe the school I am interviewing with is the top university in the United States (and could argue convincingly about this all day) it is not the number one ranked university and probably has never been.  Now if I was interviewing for a university consistently ranked number one in the United States, I would think that the university was every student’s top choice.  Because it is not the top university, I know that several people I am speaking with would probably rather go to a more prestigious university.

Now if you think about this, this rationale is very similar to what goes on when law students and attorneys are interviewing with law firms.  In an extreme, if you are interviewing with Skadden Arps Slate Meager & Flom (”Skadden”) and a small 15 person law firm in New Jersey that pays less than half of what Skadden does, most rationale observers would presume that you would rather go to Skadden than the small 15 person law firm.

Imagine for a moment what the 15 person law firm is thinking if you tell them that you are interviewing with Skadden.  Do you think that you would really want to go there?  Now imagine what Skadden is going to think if you tell them you are interviewing with the small 15 person law firm.  They are likely going to think that you are not that marketable, for one.  Or they might think that Skadden is a reach for you and want to help you advance.  You need to put yourself in the shoes of the person making hiring decisions because what they think will determine whether or not you are ultimately hired.

Why do I ask myself if the student really wants to attend the university I am interviewing for? I ask myself this question because I want to make sure that if I put a strong recommendation behind the person they are likely to attend the school.  Do not get me wrong: If you are a stellar applicant you will still get a stellar recommendation.  But someone who really wants what you are offering is always going to be far more attractive than someone who does not.

What the University does with this information is their business.  However, I do like to be able to say “the University is this person’s first choice and I am confident they will come if they are admitted.  I believe the person that the school is their first choice because of X, Y and Z.  Furthermore, they are the sort of person I imagine would do quite well there because they share so much in common with others students I knew while there.”

When a law firm is interviewing you, the same sort of logic applies.  Law firms receive numerous applications from highly qualified individuals constantly.  If a law firm thinks you will never take an offer from them, they are not going to be interested in speaking with you.  In the event you do get an interview, if the law firm thinks you are just looking to go to the most prestigious law firm (and they are not that prestigious) then the law firm is not likely to make you an offer.

As an aside, I should note that I see this sort of phenomenon all the time.  I deal with attorneys at some of the top law firms in the world on a daily basis.  Many of these attorneys want to go to smaller firms that pay far less.  While most of these attorneys are under the impression that the smaller firm would “die” to have them, the opposite is most often true.  If the attorney is coming from a far superior law firm, the smaller law firm and its attorneys might be intimidated by hiring the attorney because they never worked in such a smaller law firm.  People do not like to spend time with those they think (or others think) are superior to them.

You can draw on personal experience in this analogy.  One example would probably be a lot of your high school friends if you went to a public school and now practice law.  A lot of these people probably have not done much with their lives.  You are not the same people anymore and they are not as comfortable around you anymore.  They are uncomfortable because they perceive inequality.  Surely this does not apply to all your past friends, however, I am confident it applies to many of them.  Regardless of how you may feel with this continued association, they are not like as likely to be as comfortable.  This is also one reason people do not tend to marry outside their social class, for example.  It creates too many difficulties due to a perceived superior and inferior role.  No one likes to be around others that remind them of their potential inadequacies.  Law firms are the exact same.

I am an expert in getting attorneys jobs inside law firms.  I know nothing about in-house placements, or other sorts of legal-related placements.  Law firms, by their nature, are strange and unique creatures.  Law firms want to save face.  Having someone take another offer over them makes the law firm look bad in their eyes.  It makes them feel inferior.  This sort of event makes it seem to the attorneys that interviewed the candidate that the other law firm is a more attractive alternative.  It is also a negative vote of confidence from you if you do not take an offer if one is extended.

So how does the question of whom you are interviewing with fit into the equation?  First, you need to answer this question.  This question will rarely be asked at the beginning of the interview, though.  This is a very important question to answer and it must be answered correctly.  Before you ever answer this question, though, the law firm you are interviewing with must-and I mean must-know that they are your first choice.  If the firm thinks this then telling them everywhere you are interviewing can help you.

Back to the situation with the 15 person New Jersey firm.  You could still very easily get an offer from this firm if you play your cards right.  First, you need to walk into this interview and convince the firm that you really want to work there.  Maybe you know someone at the firm that has said good things about it.  Maybe they practice in an area of law you have been interested in since high school.  Maybe their office is right across the street from your house.  Maybe you want to work in a smaller firm so you can make partner.  You need an arsenal at your disposal to give the law firm compelling reasons for hiring you.  If you give the firm enough reasons that you are a good fit, they will look upon the fact that Skadden is interviewing you as something that verifies your worth in the market.  The firm needs to think that you will be their first choice over Skadden.  You taking an offer from them over Skadden will be a major vote of confidence in the small firm that is something the firm will use to impress upon its attorneys as to what a great place they are.

When I am interviewing candidates for the University, I can answer the question of whether or not the candidate is really interested in my opportunity in several ways.  For example, if the student has 1580 on their SATs, is Captain of the football team, student counsel president and first in their class and my school is the only top school they are applying to then my job is easy. The student most likely is most interested in what my school offers.

Even if the student is applying to several more prestigious schools, I can still judge whether or not this same applicant really wants to attend the University by several methods: (1) If their parents went to the University and they have always wanted to go there, (2) If they attended the University for summer school, (3)  If they worked for a professor of the University during high school, and (4)  If their life has been profoundly influenced by the work of some professor they want to study under.  You should get the idea.  Even without this a stellar applicant will still get serious consideration.  The point is your interviewer wants to say “this school is their first choice and I believe it.”

A law firm wants the same assurances that they are your first choice.  These assurances need to be given at the interview stage and they need to be given early on. This is not an article about interviewing and I cannot tell you how to interview.  I can tell you, though, that when a law firm believes you are their first choice you will have a better chance of getting an offer with the firm.

In an improving market (which this is) you are likely to get more than one interview and may very well end up with several offers. Accordingly, you may often be asked in interviews who else you are speaking with and so forth. How you address this question will actually have a strong bearing on whether or not an employer hires you.

2.                 How You Justify Why You Are Interviewing With Other Firms Will Have A Direct Bearing On Whether Or Not The Employer Hires You

There are several scenarios that you should be aware of and each one merits a separate response.  If you have prepared the interviewer properly, you will do very well when asked where else you are interviewing.  The potential scenarios are: (a) you are not interviewing with any other employers, (b) you are interviewing entirely will less prestigious firms, (c) you are interviewing with a mix of firms, corporations and other types of employers, (d) you are interviewing with a mix of more prestigious and less prestigious firms, and (e) you are interviewing with all more prestigious firms.  Given the importance of each of these hypotheticals, they will all be discussed below.

a.                  You are not interviewing with any other employers

If you are not interviewing with any other employers then you should tell the firm so.  If you are in law school and this is occurring, the firm should be under the impression that you are just starting the interview process if this is the only interview you have so far.  Employers do not want to feel as if you are the black sheep and someone without a lot of options.

If you are interviewing laterally, it is perfectly acceptable to tell the employer that you are not interviewing with any other employers.  In this situation, the rationale for having only one interview should be that (1) you are not interested in a new job for the sake of a new job, and (2) the only reason you are speaking with this firm is because they are a perfect fit for your interests.  The firm needs to think they are a perfect match for you.  There are several additional reasons firms like to hear you are interviewing only with them:

?It makes you look loyal to your current employer-by stating that you are interviewing with only one employer, it makes it seem as if you are not doing an “all out” search to find new positions.  You are only interested in this one interview because the firm matches what you are seeking so closely.

?It puts the firm in a position where they know if they make you an offer you are likely to take it-By having only one interview, the firm can give itself more assurances that if an offer is made to you that you will likely take it.

?It puts the firm in a position where they know if they make you an offer you will not choose one of their competitors over them-If you inform the firm that you have only one interview, the firm will have the assurance that they will not look “lose face” if you take an offer from one of their competitors.

b. You are interviewing entirely with less prestigious employers

There are some potential positives to this admission.  The positives are:

?Since we are the best firm, if we make the candidate an offer they will most likely come here.

?If the firm is more prestigious than the one you are currently at, the employer will think that you are trying to “move up”.  It is almost axiomatic in American culture that we respect individuals who are trying to move up and improve their lot in life.  After all, most of our ancestors were immigrants at some point and moved up the ladder.  Indeed, some of their offspring are now even lawyers!

If you tell your interviewer that your other interviews are will less prestigious employers, you may have a problem.  Here, the firm will certainly think to itself: “Can’t this attorney get an interview with better firms?  Is there something wrong with them that we are missing?”

In this situation, you need to be very careful.  One way to approach this is to state that you only are applying to places with openings and these are the only firms you are aware of with openings.  In this way, the firm will believe that you are applying to these other firms and them simply in response to what you know.  While in all likelihood you probably applied to more prestigious firms and have not heard back or were rejected, if the former is true you need to make the firm aware of it.

The most important thing you can do in this situation is to make it clear to the firm that you are qualified to work for them.  For example, if you are interviewing with less prestigious firms that pays far less then tell the more prestigious firm that money is not a concern for you.  Here, you can tell the firm you are most concerned with finding the “right fit” and that the less prestigious firms have a lot of attributes that might not be immediately transparent.  In this instance, you put yourself in the position of someone who is more concerned with practicing law in the right environment than someone who is concerned with making as much money as possible.  This sort of characterization can only help you.

There are many ways to get creative with this response.  In sum, the most important thing you can do in a situation where all of your interviews are with less prestigious firms is to make the firm aware that (1) you are very interested in them, (2) seeking to move up, and (3) most concerned about finding a good fit.

c.       You are interviewing with a mix of different classes of employers such as law firms, government offices and corporations

This is also a potential problem for you.  If you are interviewing with different classes of employers beyond law firms then you also need to be extremely careful.  The problem with this is that law firms are unique institutions.  Most law firms have a billable hour requirement, have a division between partners and associates, encourage you to develop business and so forth.  While I have written extensively on this topic before, the point is that law firms are unique institutions that have great respect for their own way of practicing law but look down on those who do not practice law under their methodology.  For example, many law firm attorneys consider government attorneys lazy bureaucrats and look upon going in-house as a way to escape the pressure of law firm life.  While these generalizations are not necessarily true, what is important to realize is that law firms think this way and believe that individuals that do not want to practice inside a law firm are not cut out for law firm life.  Accordingly, telling a law firm you are interviewing with the government or and in-house employer is not necessarily in your best interest.

How you address this question is up to you.  You must tell people where you are interviewing.  If you are asked what other law firms you are interviewing with, then tell them what other law firms.  You need to be honest with employers and not doing so is not only ethically wrong but will come back to haunt you.

If you are interviewing with an employer that is different than a law firm and are asked about this, you are going to need to let the employer know why you are going out on these interviews.  There can be many potential explanations.  Perhaps a friend asked you to interview with an in-house employer, you are interested in environmental law and interviewing with the environmental branch of the United States Department of Justice so you can get more experience doing environmental trials.  Whatever the explanation you give for these other interviews, though, it is essential that you let the firm know that (1) a law firm is your first choice and (2) the other employer represents an opportunity for you to get significant experience and “move up” in terms of your skill level and so forth with a law firm.

In any law firm interview you go on, one of the most important things you can do for yourself is leave the firm with the impression that your actions in seeking to leave your current employer are motivated to “move up” and become a better attorney.  However you phrase the fact that you are interviewing with other types of employers than law firms, this point needs to be made.  Law firms want to hire winners.  The fact that you are interviewing with non law firms interviews a lot of potential doubt in the law firms mind that you are not committed to practicing law in a law firm.  Make them think the alternatives you are exploring to this are just as demanding.
d.      You are interviewing with a mix of more prestigious and less prestigious firms

The issue in this situation is about the most normal occurrence for attorneys interviewing with law firms.  Most attorneys that are interviewing are speaking with more prestigious and less prestigious firms.  Here, your case does not need to be as compelling.  Like in all the situations discussed above, the employer still must be left with the impression that they are your first choice.  In addition, the employer must have a basis for understanding why you are interviewing with more than one firm.

Assuming that you have done your job of giving the employer the impression they are your first choice., the employer should also understand why you are speaking with so many different sorts of law firms.  Here, the employer needs to be aware of why you are doing such a broad search.  Accordingly, the employer needs to be aware of why something is seriously wrong with your current employment situation.

This is again a delicate topic.  In all interviews you never want to leave the employer with the impression that you harbor any sort of ill will towards your current employer.  Employers typically do not like attorneys who say bad things about those they work for because they believe that they could one day be on the opposite side of this.  This simply makes you look bad.  What you do need to do in the interview, though, is convince the employer that your current employment situation is preventing you from reaching your full potential.  You need to project that you are leaving your current employer because you are trying to grow.

By upward momentum, I mean that your desire is to be better at you job, get more business, get better work and so forth.  In sum, you should always try and portray yourself and your job search as follows:

While your decision to join your current employer was a good one, you have continued a pattern of “growth” that has characterized you from the very beginning and is evident in everything you have ever done.  While it is unfortunate, your current firm is limiting your growth potential.  The environment of the firm you are interviewing with offers this growth potential and that is why you are speaking with them.  In fact, the growth potential of the firm you are interviewing with offers is “hands down” the best of the bunch in terms of the employers you are speaking with because of X and Y and Z …

If you were someone in charge of determining who you were going to hire, which candidate would you want to hire (1) someone without compelling reasons for being interested in your firm, (2) or someone who needs the environment your firm offers to grow?  I am sure you can see the logic of this.

It is a fundamental human characteristic that we want to feel good about ourselves.  Finding someone who needs an organization like ours to thrive and letting them work with such an organization is something that makes hiring authorities feel good about themselves.  You need to give employers compelling reasons for hiring you.

Moreover, giving yourself “upward mobility” makes you sound like a winner and not a loser.  People want to associate with winners and not losers.  Firms want to hire winners and not losers.  Give yourself upward mobility.

e. You are interviewing entirely with more prestigious firms

Given what has been said above, this section should not require a great deal of analysis. Here, you want to make the law firm believe that they are your first choice and that you will accept an offer from them if extended.  The firm needs to feel special and understand your reasons for choosing them over competing opportunities.
3. Conclusions

You need to understand that how you address where else you are interviewing will have a major impact on whether or not you are hired.  This, in fact, is one of the more important secrets to interviewing effectively.  If there is one thing you take from this article it should be this: Always make the firm you are interviewing with feel like you are their first choice.

Long Term Success in With a Single Employer

If you go into any firm that has been around more than twenty or thirty years you will inevitably find a handful of attorneys who have been there from the very beginning of their careers.  These well adjusted souls will typically report to work each day at a similar time and have managed to be the only ones presumably left in the law firm after generation upon generation of attorney coming and going.

Many attorneys do last for decades in the same firm and there are characteristics which uniformly seem to characterize these sorts of attorneys.  While I am a legal recruiter, I do have a great deal of respect for attorneys who in this day and age are able to “stay put” at the same firm for a long period of time and remain at single firms throughout their careers.  None of this is to say there are not really good and solid reasons for leaving a law firm or other legal environment if the going gets impossible.  I am the first to admit that there are legal employment environments that can be intolerable for many.  Nevertheless, you need to keep in mind that if a legal employer has been around for 30+ years there is a chance the employer is doing something right.  Before leaving it is often wise to take inventory of yourself.

There are certain characteristics that tend to characterize attorneys who stick with the same legal employer for long lengths of time and also certain characteristics of this sort of employment situation.  These characteristics are discussed below:

1. Attorneys Who Remain With the Same Firm for Long Lengths of Time Are Generally Very Committed to Their Jobs

Many people were raised with the idea (or have the idea) that fidelity to an employer is something that is simply expected.  The unwritten rule is that if you are not treated horribly then there is really no reason you should ever end up leaving a job.

One of the saddest but also the most refreshing things I have seen as a legal recruiter is when I interview and meet with attorneys who have been with the same firm for 20 years or more and whose firms are going under-or who are in a position of being forced to look for other opportunities.  When attorneys like this look for a new position their rationale is most often that something profound has happened at the firm that is making their separation necessary.  These attorneys appear as if they are going through a divorce or have just had a death of someone they are very close to.  For these sorts of attorneys, leaving a position is something that would be unthinkable and only in the event of a massive trauma.

This sort of fidelity between employers and employees reminds me often of people who have been married 50 years or more.  There is a mutual respect that comes out of this and a thinking that both need one another.  I believe that this sort of thinking is really missing in this day and age.  While this may not seem related to careers, a statistic I once saw in a social science class showed that as divorce rates went up in society so did rates of drug abuse, suicide and other associated societal ills.  The bond between an employer and an employee is a powerful force that in its best form is much like the bond between a husband and wife with a very committed relationship.  Both sides respect and accept one another with certain conditions but for the most part unconditionally.

The attorney who is committed to their job is in many respects similar to someone who is committed to anything-there may be something else out there but they have decided to remain loyal.  This sort of attitude is a very healthy one I believe and can also make these sorts of attorneys very settled.  I know an attorney that was called by a rival firm and offered over $1,000,000 a year by this firm when he was making just barely above half of that.  He was not interested in the money and was more concerned with the bond he had with his current firm.  This is how it works when there is commitment on both ends.

2. Attorneys Who Remain With the Same Firm Are Not Interested in Office Gossip or Reasons Not to Succeed

In every organization there are typically people who are not succeeding at their jobs.  These people generally are not doing their work in a competent manner and are also often looking for ways to cut corners with their work.  Most organizations will generally call out this behavior and then speak with the employee. Some employees correct their behavior and others simply get mad at the organization.  Some employees may be mad at their organizations for no particular reason at all-or may be angry with a previous organization and simply transfer their anger to their most recent organization.  I remember a recruiter once telling me never to hire someone who had been fired from their last job.  People who have been fired from their last job will typically take out their anger on their next organization he told me.

With anger a part of every legal employment organization, you need to understand that there are always going to be people in the organization who have a lot of anger towards their employers.  These angry employees will start rumors, attempt to share their anger with others in the organization and often subtly (or not so subtly) forecast “gloom and doom” for their employer.  This is how rumor mills get started and these sorts of rumor mills are prevalent in every legal organization there is for the most part.

Attorney who remain with their employers generally do not participate in these rumor mills or even pay attention to them.  At certain times in an employer’s history there are likely to be calls of “crisis” of seemingly epidemic proportions as lots of people leave, for example.  At other times there will be other issues.  The overwhelming characteristic of attorneys who remain at firms for long periods of time is that they generally pay no attention to these rumor mills whatsoever.
3. Attorneys Who Remain With the Same Firm for Long Periods of Time Generally Are Not Interested in Being Grandstanders-They Are There to Do Their Jobs and Do Them Well

I once heard someone say that the most successful people are often the most screwed up.  I am not sure if this is true, but there is some wisdom in every saying like this.  Attorneys who are able to remain with the same employer for long periods of time are generally not concerned with “getting ahead” to the same extent as many other attorneys are.  Many attorneys who are extremely concerned with getting ahead will often leave saying they are looking for better opportunities because they are interested in immediate advancement.  In other cases attorneys will try and show up various attorneys in their firm.

Attorneys who remain at their firms for long periods of times are generally most interested in just doing their jobs.  They have faith in their organizations and that things will work out for them.  They are not loud and do not go out of their way to attract attention to themselves.  Their main concern is to simply do the best job possible.

What ends up happening to attorneys who remain focused on their work and not grandstanding is they end up getting ahead while other attorneys end up putting their foot in their mouth.  I remember when I first started practicing an attorney who was first in his class from a major law school and the Editor in Chief of his school’s law review.  Everyone thought this particular attorney was really on his toes and someone likely to have major success at the firm.  This attorney wrote articles on his spare time, argued with firm partners about the finer points of law (and was right when he argued).  While this attorney was very smart he thought he was so good that he ended up sabotaging his career in the long run when he called a newspaper to discuss a case he was working on and ended up being quoted on the front page of the Los Angeles Daily Journal.  The fallout from this incredible incident that the attorney left the law firm a month or two later and never worked for a large law firm again.

These sort of incidents aside, it is important to keep a moderately low profile in order to have long-term success in a law firm.  It is never wise to raise your swords and capture the limelight.  While someone can win a sword match for some time, they will eventually lose-and in a sword match (which your legal career could be compared to)-the loss is usually permanent.

4. Attorney Who Remain With Their Firms for Long Periods of Time Are Typically Do Good (But Not Necessarily ‘Brilliant’ Work)

An attorney who remains at their firm for long periods of time typically has learned to “pace themselves” and manages to do work on a day-to-day basis that is good but not necessarily extraordinary.  This does not matter.  I would estimate that the majority of the battle of being an excellent attorney is simply showing up.  Sure some people can do extraordinary work; however, the brightest flame is not always the longest burning flame.  The ability to consistently show up and do the work is the most important aspect of being a long-term performer in a law firm.

The smartest attorneys out there are often the ones who end up having the most problems in the practice of law.  Attorneys who can consistently show up for work and do an excellent job send the message to colleagues, clients and others that they have the ability to get the job done.  In the end it is all about getting the job done.

5. An Understanding of ‘Insiders’ and ‘Outsiders’ Typically Develops Between Attorneys Who Remain At Their Firms For Long Periods of Time

After an attorney has been with a law firm for an extended period of time and understanding develops between that attorney and others who have been at the firm a long period of time.  An institutional understanding also develops.  This understanding seems to say something to the effect of “people may come and go but we are the ones who are committed to this organization and we are the heart and soul of this place.”  A similar sort of understanding that develops is that “we owe each other because we have each demonstrated a commitment.”

Bonds form between people who have been part of the same organization for long periods of time.  These bonds are often invisible-but they are real bonds.  These bonds are powerful and make the organization and forces within it come to the defense of those who are committed to the organization during times of organizational change and reorganization.  These sorts of bonds are something that get stronger over time as an organization changes.  After some time attorney who have been with the firm for decades are simply treated as part of the very fabric of the firm and virtually unquestioned.

Conclusions

While it may seem odd for a recruiter to write a story in defense of attorneys who remain at their firms for long periods of time, remaining with a firm for a long period of time is something that is meaningful in this day and age. There are many characteristics that of attorneys who remain at their firms for long periods of time and these characteristics in my experience are usually found in most attorneys who demonstrate this level of stability.

A final factor is that in my experience attorneys who remain with firms for long periods of time are often less tormented than the average attorney.  By looking for reasons to like and respect their organization rather than find fault, they find themselves in organizations which ultimately welcome them.

Finally, it is always important to remember that if a law firm or other legal organization has been around for 20 years or more the chances are it is doing some things very right.  There will always be people who succeed in these organizations and, of course, always those who leave or fail.

Can Experience as a Patent Prosecutor Benefit a New Attorney?

Before entering law school next fall, I will have a year of high-tech patent prosecution experience as a patent engineer.  How much will this experience benefit me when seeking an IP/Patent associate position with the big firms?  Can it make up for not being at the top of my law school class or not being from a top 25 law school?

Your experience as a high-tech patent prosecutor will certainly strengthen your application and should compensate for the fact that you have not graduated from a top 25 law school or at the top of your law school class.  Patent prosecution attorneys are typically in high demand, and the pool of attorneys with the appropriate technical background is small.  Your background will likely make you eligible to sit for and increase your chances of successfully completing the Patent Bar.

Attorneys with scientific undergraduate or graduate degrees are highly in demand in the Intellectual Property arena.  Moreover, attorneys with technical expertise in certain scientific fields are far more likely to obtain employment as a patent attorney than those without such expertise.  As a result, the pool of potential candidates for patent positions is particularly small.  To top that off, your technical experience as a patent engineer will provide you with the technical know-how to understand the technical intricacies of patent prosecution, infringement and negotiating and drafting tech-related licensing agreements and briefs.  This puts you at an advantage over many of your law school classmates.

While there are certainly differences that could be pointed out, for the most part the expertise of patent attorneys falls into the following categories: (1) the life sciences, (2) chemistry & pharmaceutical, (3) material science, (4) electrical engineering, (5) physics, (6) mechanical engineering, (7) medical devices, (8) computer science.  In terms of demand, the greatest demand is for attorneys with backgrounds in electrical engineering or computer science. There is also a strong demand for attorneys with biotechnology, biochemistry or organic chemistry backgrounds.  The lesser demand is for those with mechanical or chemical backgrounds.

The fact that you appear to have both a technical degree and a patent prosecution background, when coupled with a law degree, makes you a unique and highly desirable candidate for law firms.  While there are certainly many people who graduate each year with technical and science degrees, very few of these people may have any interest in attending law school because there is usually a good market available for these individuals, even without a law degree.  Therefore, you will be a fairly unusual commodity with a law degree.  Additionally, the demand for patent attorneys is compounded by the fact that the need for patents has continually increased dramatically.  For example, a recent article in the Legal Times stated that the number of patents issued each year has increased 30-40% since 1990.  During the same period of time, the number of software patents increased by approximately 200%.

It is important to mention, one of the reasons your background is valuable is that it makes you eligible to sit for the Patent Bar.  In order to even sit for the Patent Bar, an applicant needs prior scientific or technical level training at the Bachelor’s degree level in a science or engineering field (or significant college credits in one of these fields).  Assuming you have the requisite training to qualify to take the Patent Bar, you must also pass it, and the pass rate for the patent bar exam is much lower than for most bar exams - it typically ranges from 28% to 40%. In the 1996 exam, for example, 968 people passed, and 1794 failed.  Your engineering background and prior patent prosecution background will certainly help your chances of completing the exam successfully.  Once you pass the Patent Bar, you will have all the elements in place to have a successful law firm career.

I did notice that your question assumes that you will not be at the top of your class in law school, even though you haven’t started.  Although you will likely be a marketable attorney, graduating at or near the top of your class will dramatically improve your opportunities with top-tier firms.  I strongly encourage you to focus on your performance in law school.  Although you may still be quite successful without stellar grades, graduating at the bottom of your class may be a significant hurdle for your success, especially with respect to opportunities early on.

In conclusion, it seems as though you have all the pieces you need to begin law school and do well throughout your career.  I recommend that you focus on your grades, and pay careful attention to the firms that have an Intellectual Property practice, especially those that offer summer associate internships.  One of the best ways to make inroads with a firm is to take a summer associate position, so that you will be in the pool of law students from which they choose full-time associates.  We wish you the best of luck!

What I Have Learned About Interviewing In Law Firms

What are the most important rules of thumb for attorneys to remember about job interviews?
- Dress for success.
- Give concise answers. Long rambling answers will always negatively affect your chances of landing the job. Let the interviewers draw their own conclusions.
- Don’t get into detail about previous work. Revealing too much about old jobs, clients, or cases will make you seem untrustworthy.
- Be aware of your body language. You can say a lot without opening your mouth, so remain conscious of it.
- Be honest. You’re not expected to be superhuman, so stretching the truth can only get you into trouble.
- Be prepared. Come into the interview knowing what you want to get across and ready to take on some tough questions. Know what’s on your resume. Getting caught off guard by something on your own resume reflects poorly on you.

What is the best way to develop a rapport with the interviewer?
- A job interview is like a blind date in that both sides are a feel a little nervous and forced.
- Standard blind date rules apply: nice handshake, maintain eye contact, smile when appropriate, and always listen!
- Listening is the most crucial part. It can be difficult for attorneys to get out of talking mode, but the interviewer should do about 80% of the talking.
- Paraphrase what the interviewer says back to him or her to show you are paying attention.

Is there a decent way to answer the dreaded question “Tell me a little about yourself”
- Most people are uncomfortable with it, but it’s really a great opportunity to make an impression.
- Treat it like an essay in school and think about it before hand.
- Draw a correlation between how you describe yourself and the job description, be subtle, but connect your personality with the firm’s work.

“What do you know about our firm?” How can this question be best handled?
- If you’re using a recruiter, they will do the necessary research and tell you everything you need to know before hand.
- If not, always do your research. Use the Internet.
- Learn about the firm’s philosophy, successes, and history.

Can you recommend any particular resources for doing research on a firm prior to the interview?
- Most firms now have their own web pages. Try finding the firm on Google.
- Judged.com has law firm profiles, salary information and reviews from the attorneys who work there

What if you’re asked to address your personal weaknesses?
- This can be turned into a positive as well; say you’re a workaholic, that you can’t let a problem go until it is resolved.
- It’s best to keep everything positive, that way you create a positive association in the interviewer’s mind.

How do you address inappropriate questions, like are you married, or questions about politics?
- If you’re uncomfortable answering a question, and it is indeed inappropriate, just ask how it is related to the job.
- Be polite even if you think it’s inappropriate.

The adversarial nature of lawyers, does it work against attorneys in a job interview situation?
- A job interview is not a test of wills, it’s an opportunity to demonstrate that you can think, listen, and articulate.
-Coming off as pushy or arrogant is a turn-off. Even if the job requires aggressiveness, you don’t want to seem like someone who is difficult to deal with.

What’s the best way to summarize your entire background? Even for law students and young attorneys it can be difficult to encapsulate their whole history in a few sentences. For experienced attorneys, it can be a nightmare.
- Stick to what’s relevant for the job you’re applying to.
- Refer to the resume; make it easier for the interviewer.
- Bring a list of representative casework.

What about underqualified attorneys? How can they address a question about their background?
- The interviewer may have already made up their mind about whether you’re over or under-qualified, but you can make up for a lack of experience by expressing a personality match with the firm.

How about after the interview… thank you letter or no thank you letter?
- The cons of the thank you letter outrank the potential benefits.
- Even the most gracious and classy thank you letters can backfire.
- They can make you seem desperate like you have no other options.
- Its best to leave on a high note and thank you notes give you an extra opportunity to screw up.

What’s the best way to handle a bad interview?
- Put it behind you.
- Don’t let it get you down because everybody has bad interviews.
- The most important thing is to always appear enthusiastic. After a bad interview, be sure not to let it show in the next interview. Lawyers need to be “up” when appearing in front of judges or clients, so it is crucial to show that you have an upbeat personality.
- Getting rejected after an interview is usually not your fault. Internal firm politics and issues of personal chemistry generally play a very heavy role in employment decision-making.
How can a qualified attorney screw up in the interview?
- Showing up late is a sign of disrespect.
- Criticizing your last job is a major red flag.
- Lack of preparation will always make you look bad.
- It’s important to be confident, but don’t be arrogant or act like loose cannon. Never appear as though the job isn’t important to you.
- Don’t lie! Getting caught in a lie is the worst way to spoil an interview.

“Why are you leaving your present position?” or “Why did you leave your present position?” — how do you address this? What if you parted on bad terms?
- You never want to say anything negative about your old firm.
- You don’t want to seem like a gossip. They will think you might badmouth them if they hire you.
- Turn it into a positive. Say that you want increased responsibility with a firm that offers growth or a firm that is a match with your personality and skills.

What about “How did you do in law school?” Can you honestly answer the question if you didn’t do well in law school or went to a bad school?
- Be honest. If you had good grades or went to a good school, it’s a plus.
- If you don’t want to mention the grades, steer the conversation to something worthwhile you did in law school (extracurriculars).
- Don’t be embarrassed of “ok” grades; grades aren’t everything especially if you’ve been out of school for a while.

How important are the clothes you wear?
- Clothes aren’t the most important factor, but they can’t be underestimated.
- No one ever got a job for dressing nicely, but people have lost out on jobs for not dressing nicely.
- Always go for a more conservative style of dress:
-  Men: suit, tie, leather shoes
-  Women: business skirt, low-heeled conservative shoes; avoid perfume and flashy jewelry.
- Even if the firm is more casual, dress conservative for the interview.

Any advice for the shy? How do you appear to be confident when nervous?
- Rehearse! Write up practice questions and answers.
- Do it in front of the mirror.
- Have a friend or relative ask you questions.
- Be thoroughly prepared for every possible question. Its better to be over-prepared than to be caught off guard.
- Be conscious of the telltale signs of nervous behavior, fidgeting, stammering, saying “you know”
- Try to relax, but don’t get too relaxed. Revealing too many personal details, taking off your shoes, or treating the interviewer like one of your pals can make you look like a crazy person.

What are the differences in interviewing with a big firm vs. a small or mid-sized firm?
- Many big firms have a set of procedures for interviews and things are more rigid. They will often have callback interviews, which is not a guarantee that you will get an offer.
- Smaller firm interviews can be less formal sometimes, but you should always appear conservative even if the interview is less formal.

What are the differences between interviews with associates and junior partners and interviews with senior associates and partners?
- Junior partners and associates are still “gunners” who are often in competition with the rest of the attorneys. Do not act too competitive or they might see you as a threat. Act friendly.
- Older partners aren’t usually caught up in competition with the rest of the staff. They will want to see a competitive edge. They will also be more concerned with things like grades. Act hard working and determined.

How should an attorney handle an interview in an unconventional situation? Law firms will often take you out to lunch or for drinks to get to know you.
- The worst mistake is to get drunk. If the interviewer is drinking, have the same thing and take it very easy.
- Eat at the same pace as the interviewer and only order the basics. Don’t order an appetizer or desert if the interviewer doesn’t, etc. This ties right into the whole notion of appearing conservative at all times.
- Mind your manners and always treat your servers with respect. The same goes for receptionists in the office. No one wants to work with a jerk, so always be courteous to everyone in the entire job interview process.
- Don’t let your guard down. Unconventional interviews like this test mainly your small talk skills, but you should approach them with the same level of respect and enthusiasm as any other interview.

What about videoconference interviews?
- Technology is advancing and videoconferencing is becoming more and more common.
- It’s a great way to look for a job during a lunch break without battling traffic, etc.
- Don’t forget that they can see you. No nose picking, yawning, looking around the room.

How important is it to ask questions?
- It shows you’re paying attention and capable of critical thinking.
- Ask for more details about job responsibilities, how work is assigned, possibilities for advancement, and possibilities for independent decision-making.

What questions should be avoided?
- Don’t ask about salary, vacation time, working hours, start date.
- Don’t appear overanxious to get the job.
- Don’t express reservations about taking the job. If you have reservations, deal with them later. During the interview, your goal is to make a positive impression.