When an attorney is searching for a position and choosing what type of law firm to work in, they have two options:
Law firms serving companies pay more because companies have more money to spend. Therefore, these law firms often work more on the same matters because clients will pay for it. Salaries are higher. Because companies expect their high billing rates to be matched with attorneys with certain backgrounds, class rank, law school, and similar qualifications are more important in law firms serving companies than in those serving individuals.
, stationed above a post office in a small former lumber town that had been declining since the early 1900s, Bay City, Michigan, we had a class action filed by employees of banana pickers somewhere in Central America against Dow Chemical (located close to the courthouse). It was over some chemicals they sold to the companies operating banana plantations. There were probably 25 law firms involved. We were all in the judge's library, with standing room only, and one of the attorneys announced in front of the judge that another attorney who was co-counsel was from the law firm
in New York. The attorney from this firm looked completely unintimidating, bookish, and not someone I imagined lasted long at this firm. Nevertheless, with the exception of the judge, who could have cared less, a bunch of the attorneys in the room seemed to look at this young, first-year associate in awe, all at the same time.
“This is crazy,” I thought to myself. However, as soon as I became a legal recruiter, I saw this pattern repeat itself on a daily basis. Attorneys at less prestigious law firms serving individuals almost always would jump at the chance to work at law firms serving companies. Everyone seemingly wanted to work at these law firms. Among the law firms serving companies, of course, there are huge differences in the brands and how prestigious each sort of firm is. Attorneys at less prestigious firms serving companies wanted to move up. Attorneys at more prestigious law firms never wanted to move down. Attorneys at firms serving companies often
Presumptions and Realities in Legal Practice
There is a presumption among most law students that law firms representing companies needing legal services are more prestigious and have more opportunities—namely because of the level of presumed prestige, salaries, and more. There is a presumption among most attorneys in law firms representing companies that their firms are better. There is a feeling of inferiority among attorneys working in law firms representing individuals that they are somehow missing out on something and are inferior to attorneys working in large law firms. None of this is correct—it makes no sense when you compare the two types of law firms.
See Related Articles:
Over the past several years, I have come to a different realization regarding how attorneys at all levels should think about representing individuals or smaller law firms. I've realized this because I believe it is insane and nonsensical. Until recently, the only candidates recruiters at my company,
BCG Attorney Search, would represent were attorneys who had attended the best schools and were working in the best firms—primarily in the largest cities. They were often drawn to the profession with the promise that they would remain "connected" to big firms and big firm attorneys through their roles as "advisors" and recruiters helping these attorneys and big firms. If anyone went against this orthodoxy, they were simply wrong—candidates not from the best firms were summarily rejected, their calls were not returned, their emails not responded to, their resumes ignored, and statements made amongst the recruiters that these attorneys not at the
largest and most prestigious law firms were second-class citizens.
Many of the more prestigious law firms were also of this opinion. If we attempted to represent an attorney not from the
most prestigious law schools, with the best grades, not coming from the best firms, these law firms would get angry with us as well, sometimes threatened to never do business with us again if we continued having faith in less qualified attorneys, and drove the message home that this behavior from a vendor was unacceptable.
Rethinking Success in the Legal Field
There are reasons law firms behave this way, and it is to be expected given their businesses, but this does mean that 98% of the attorneys in the market are avoided. In addition, these same firms would get mad at us if we attempted to represent one of the formerly haloed attorneys with more than six to seven years of experience if
they did not have substantial portable business—of course they did not have substantial portable business—they have been billing crazy hours to the largest clients all the time and do not have the time to develop business. No major company is going to give business to an associate. Once associates outlive their use to most large law firms, they are pushed aside and younger models (or models with business) are brought in to take their places. This model has worked this way for generations. It was initially developed by
Cravath Swaine and Moore in the 1950s, and other law firms seeking to become large law firms like Cravath have copied this ever since and become successful doing so. There is no reason to stop what is working for them—and I am not suggesting they do.
Personal Experiences with Divorce Attorneys and Observations on Their Success
Several years ago, when I was going through a divorce, I noticed that my wife's attorney had attended
Stanford Law School and, before becoming a
divorce attorney, had spent several years as an associate at a very well-regarded law firm, Quinn Emanuel. When I asked him why he had become a divorce attorney, he told me it was a "no-brainer". If he tried to leave the firm and attract large companies as clients, he never would have gotten anywhere. Here, he was up and billing $600 an hour and getting as much divorce work as he wanted within weeks. Most attorneys from big firms do not do this stuff—but he did.
On my quest to find a divorce attorney, I hired Wasserman Comden for a brief period. They were making so much money and had such
high bars for becoming a client, I could not believe it. Somehow, they let me in the door because they forgot to ask me if I had something like $25 million in liquid assets to pay them and fight about.
After representing me for a week or so and discovering my dire financial situation, they told me that billing me tens of thousands of dollars a week was not something I was cut out for. I was not entitled to this particular type of representation. In contrast to my wife’s attorney, none of these attorneys had gone to great schools or anything of the sort—but they were doing quite well representing individuals. Bruce Wasser told me I needed a “Ford” and not a “Ferrari” for my divorce. I was summarily led out of the office, down a hall by an attorney who called himself the "Law Offices of" and essentially dropped me off at his door and told me this was what I needed.
Both these attorneys, and my wife’s attorney, had an enthusiasm about them and confidence I did not see in most law firm attorneys. When Bruce Wasser introduced me to my new attorney, who also did not have anything special in his pedigree, he gave me a tour of his high-rent office and showed off his collection of art by well-known artists. Unlike partners in large law firms, these attorneys were fit, suntanned, and seemed happy and in control over their careers and not at risk of all this falling apart. Instead of a few large clients—or one—they could lose at any moment, they had many of them. Their businesses were diversified, and they could afford to be happy, were not reporting to anyone, and not at risk of losing their jobs at a moment's notice. This happens to even the most successful partners at large law firms—but you do not hear much about this with attorneys with law firms.
Instability and Risks in Large Law Firms
Let's talk a little bit about job security. Years ago, I left a voicemail message (about an associate candidate whose name I neglected to mention) for a partner that I knew had a lot of business (something like $25 million) in the Los Angeles office of a large New York law firm. When he called me back the next morning from his car, I never got to ask about the associate because he wanted help with his search. Over the next few days, we went back and forth on his daily commute, and I mentioned a variety of firms to him that he had applied to that had gone nowhere. I could not understand this—wouldn’t the
most prestigious and largest law firms in Los Angeles be interested in someone with $25 million in business being performed at a high billing rate?
Then I learned the real reason this guy was in such a hurry and so panicked:
All of his business was from one client, and stuff was slowing down. There was trouble on the horizon, and law firms he was interviewing with smelled blood. Ultimately, he went to a firm that could afford and would have other stuff for him to do, even as a service partner, if this all disappeared. Everything was contingent on him keeping that one client when he made that move.
This pattern of complete insecurity of partners in large law firms has continued to repeat repeatedly. One attorney with a great book of business was fired from his firm because he wore a pair of jeans with a rip where part of his underwear was viewable on his calf. A woman associate complained and, rather than risking the optics of a lawsuit, summarily fired him and gave him a few minutes to pack his things and get out of the office with no job. One attorney that was the head of a major law firm's corporate practice group was fired because an attorney he was supposed to be helping bring in a client complained that he smelled like liquor (after getting off an international long-distance flight to travel to the office and meet the potential client). He did not get the work; the other attorney complained and lost his job. Another partner in a major Chicago firm with $40 million in business was fired because it came out that he had an affair with a staff member of the firm when he was an associate.
Attorneys who lose too much business are often let go, have their compensation drastically reduced, and often have any equity they have in the firm taken away and given deadlines to find new positions or leave with nothing.
Some law firms even require their partners to retire at the age of 65—even though it is now the norm for people to run for the presidency and hold responsibilities for the entire United States in their 80s.
When each of these people loses their jobs, they are considered toxic to other law firms, toxic to their clients, and their careers often come to an end. This is why these attorneys all tow a party line and
do whatever they can to please their peers and avoid getting into trouble, be it a partner or an associate. Associates have it even worse because they are essentially on life support the entire time they are there and are certain the plug will be pulled at some point—because this happens to almost everyone at these firms—because they witness it repeatedly.
Regardless, everyone wants to jump into these firms that offer less security, are quick to force you out, make it harder to get clients, make it more difficult for you to establish (or maintain) a client base—and, in general, can make your life miserable.
The Success of Attorneys Serving Individuals and Not Companies
I have noticed a pattern throughout the last several years of my career. Many of the most successful attorneys, who are the most secure, work for themselves or in practice areas where they serve individuals and not companies. I just keep seeing it over and over again. I estimate that the percentage of attorneys representing individuals and not large companies is somewhere in the neighborhood of 95% to 98% of all attorneys out there.
A few years ago, a woman stopped by my house to look at a piece of exercise-related equipment for a friend of hers who wanted to ship it to Chicago. Because she told me she was an immigration attorney with her private practice, I was interested and asked her a few questions. Before long, I learned that she had over 50 employees, and her law firm was grossing over $20 million a year. She had personal relationships where she could pick up the phone and speak with diplomats from various countries. More recently, she was knighted in one country for sending them so much passport business. She lives in a house designed by a world-famous architect. She has no boss and has achieved all of this without ever having worked with another attorney when she started her firm. She graduated from law school and could not get a job, so she started her own firm.
More recently, I have begun meeting personal injury attorneys around Los Angeles through a business group I am a part of. One went to
Harvard and worked for
O’Melveny and Myers, another went to Michigan and started his own firm, another went to an unaccredited law school and started his own firm. Another I do not know much about other than he has his jet. Another worked for 8 years at an AmLaw law firm, then left to do
personal injury law, and now has a good-sized law firm. Every single one of these individuals makes more money, has more freedom, seems healthier, and happier than many of their counterparts in large law firms. I doubt these individuals would have become partners in giant law firms in each case. They would not have been as successful if they went to work inside of companies. None of them would be where they are today if they had not started working for individuals and not companies.
See Related Articles:
The Illusion of Success and the Reality Behind It
A short time ago, I was reading the Wall Street Journal in a section called "Mansion" or something similar. The article talked about how some young, happy-looking guy had bought a house in Los Angeles for $30,000,000 and then spent three years redoing it for $15 million and buying art. There were few pictures of him and his beautiful young family posing for pictures in the home's garden. "Surely, this guy must be the CEO or owner of a huge tech firm!" I said to myself before looking him up. Instead, he was taken to a personal injury website with his picture taking up half the page that bragged about settlements from a truck accident, a motorcycle accident, and a few other accidents on a poorly designed website. "THE JOHNSON FAMILY GOT $9 MILLION FROM A TRUCK ACCIDENT!" "THE LOPEZ FAMILY GOT $4 MILLION FOR A MOTORCYCLE ACCIDENT."
When I was 32 years old, I purchased a home that backed up to a large, ornate mansion with a giant sculpture commissioned in front of it. There were expensive German cars going in and out of it. The home seemingly had workers doing projects there daily. A few months after I moved in, one of the families in my more modest part of the neighborhood invited me over for dinner, and the neighbor behind me was there. He did not seem much older than 40 and was RETIRED. I asked him what he did, and he told me that he had started a firm out of law school specializing in motorcycle accidents. "Every Kawasaki Ninja made between 1985 and 1993 has been totaled!" he told me. "What does that tell you about their safety!”
I've been a legal recruiter well past the age of 40. I picked the wrong profession, and so did many of my peers in large law firms. A few of them I worked with who were close to my age have already died of cancer, heart attacks, and other vices. Two that I know of who lost their positions in large law firms are in prison—one for running a scam where he embezzled over $50 million and another for killing his wife by pushing her off a cruise ship balcony for money. You need to do something when you lose your job in a large law firm and cannot earn a living in another big firm because you do not have any business.
The Harsh Realities of Big Law Firms
For the longest time, my law firm recruiting business has chased attorneys trying to sell their services to the largest law firms. I've also chased these law firms trying to gain their favor, be a good service provider, make them happy, and more. This is what most recruiters do. It is a tough existence. You need to be in the right place at the right time. Practice areas in large firms go through up and down cycles. Large law firms lay people off, then they contract. They have all sorts of rules that they follow to take people out of consideration—whether they are working or not, their law school grades, their seniority level (if they have too much experience, it is bad), the number of firms that they have worked for—and so much more.
Additionally, even if an attorney meets the qualifications to get into one of these firms, staying employed there for a meaningful length of time is not easy. When you leave, you can go in-house, to a smaller firm, or start something else. You certainly cannot start a business representing the large companies you were taught to work for in a large law firm.
Representing large law firms is a real business. There is nothing wrong with this—and this is no different from large law firms representing only large law firms. Being critical of this is no different than being critical of a professional tennis player at the prime of their career because they only want to play in important tournaments. Large law firms are a path—but they are not the only path. 99.999% of tennis players will never make it to Wimbledon, though. That does not make the 99.999% that do not make it to Wimbledon wrong or less deserving of the right to play tennis with other good players. Or the right to make money and be happy playing tennis. Or the right simply to feel good about themselves.
Working with Different Types of Attorneys
Recently, I have started working with all attorneys—insurance defense, family law, personal injury, trust and estates, immigration, and similar practice areas. Because the recruiters in my own law firms would not represent them, I continued to refer to them as the best candidates and work with these "castaways" myself. When I first started my recruiting business, a coach I had told me that "if you start working the leads that come in, everyone will quit so you need to give away the leads to your recruiters to keep them." Because of this, I rarely worked with the company candidates that were highly qualified after this—I did enough to keep my foot in the water, but not as much as I had in the past.
Consumer-facing Law vs. Corporate Law
As I started working with attorneys in consumer-facing practice areas, I saw that many were quite marketable. This 95-98% that had been ignored were suddenly teaching me all sorts of lessons about what worked and did not work in the legal placement and recruiting business. In fact, there is a lot of demand for attorneys in consumer-facing practice areas. There is demand in both large and small markets. You can get a job and work with these firms anywhere in the country. Instead of working in large markets with a ton of competition for law firms serving companies, you can work anywhere—from the largest to the smallest markets.
Because you are serving individuals and the ways of attracting these clients are well-known (billboards, online advertisements, social media), if you are good enough at advertising, you can generate many clients without too much difficulty. When you work in practice areas representing individuals, you are learning a business you can start anytime. You can work in a large, medium, or smaller market if you need a job and want to work for someone. There is very little barrier to entry for attorneys in markets serving individuals. Some of the best attorneys in consumer-facing practice areas I know barely graduated from law school and passed the bar only after multiple attempts. You can be an attorney with world-class credentials and work in this practice area, or not.
However, law firms that work for companies are a different beast. Of course, you are learning a trade, and they make great attorneys. What these firms do not do, however, is train you in a business you can take with you. They also will put up barrier after barrier to you working there. They also will give you a limited time to work there—it is up or out. They also will require you, in most cases, to work in large cities—and if you cannot work there you cannot work for them. Once you leave, you do not have the same skills that you can market if you were in a consumer-facing practice area. Your options are less pronounced.
Challenges and Opportunities in the Legal Career
Let me tell you something: I see many attorneys working in large law firms as associates and then being asked to leave or leaving before they are told they will lose their jobs. Some get positions in-house and stay there for a few years or longer. Most do not last in-house more than a few years. There are reasons for this, too numerous to get into here. Still, large companies prefer immediately transferrable skills from large law firms that are gradually lost as in-house attorneys realize they can refer work out and not do as much work. They lose their firm-imposed gung-ho attitude towards billing a lot of hours. Many attorneys succeed in-house, but many do not. Some attorneys go to small law firms, and if they can handle the drop in prestige and income, they may stay there. Many do not even try at all. Many just leave the practice of law completely. Some try and start businesses that have nothing to do with their prior experience as large law firm attorneys, and these do not go well most of the time—but sometimes they do.
However, much of what happens to these attorneys also impacts others. For example, male attorneys seem to go through a disproportionate number of divorces around the time large law firm positions end. They are faced with regret and anger about having dedicated so much of their lives to a dead end. Some start drinking heavily, others cope differently—some are angry. None of this is fun. Attorneys who were good providers previously, could afford mortgages and looked destined for good careers suddenly no longer have this. Upset at their new conditions, perhaps they push their spouses away; I do not know. The divorces most often start when the attorneys realize that their next job working in a company or another law firm is not going to end well or be tolerable. At this point, spouses often run for cover or are pushed out of the marriage by anger, substance abuse, a lack of security—who knows.
At the same time, less qualified attorneys coming out of law school often now have thriving businesses. Their partners are now getting into the prime of their careers, buying great houses, confident and happy, and doing quite well and getting better and better. This is not always the case. But it is often the case. Billboards with the attorney's name are going up all over town, on bus stops, and the attorney may even have ads on television and streaming in the middle of YouTube videos. Things are going very well, much of the time. They are confident, taking nice vacations, buying stuff, and feeling very good about their decision to enter a particular branch of consumer-facing law. This is not always the case, but it often is.
Most attorneys aspire to work at the law firms representing companies—preferably the largest ones. They feel badly when they do not get positions with these firms and need to go to work with firms that represent individuals. I've been watching the angst among attorneys doing this song and dance for 25 years and understand something now that I did not back then. While the firms that represent individuals may not pay as much to young attorneys, or represent the largest clients, for the vast majority of motivated attorneys, there is generally much more opportunity in the firms that represent individuals than those that represent companies. There is also more opportunity to start your own business, avoid politics, advance, and be rewarded for what you do. You do not see attorneys from the largest law firms reaching the heights of the most successful lawyers—but they often do.
The Inner Workings and Demands of Corporate Law Firms
Law firms working for companies needing legal services typically want their attorneys to have the best qualifications and adhere to a massive variety of rules and other ways of behaving that I have spent my career writing about and teaching. When law firms market their services to companies, the attorneys inside the companies expect these attorneys to have gone to the best law schools and gotten prior experience (if they are lateral attorneys) with other large law firms. These law firms have “up or out“ policies and, generally, the better the law firm the more difficult it is to advance. Attorneys from these law firms know where they stand in terms of the pecking order of other law firms. The amount of money these attorneys make is set each year for the first 10 years of their practice. You can generally be fired from these firms at a moment's notice for saying the wrong thing, or upsetting the wrong person. These firms are tremendously concerned with their image and like the large corporations they represent. For the most part, law students and young attorneys desire to work in these firms more than any other.
The pecking order of these firms is essentially based on how large the company they are doing work for is and how important the work they do is. The firms with the best attorneys and reputation may only be called upon for the most important "bet the company" matters, or crucial matters and charge the highest fees. A very small percentage of attorneys get positions with these firms—most of them are based in New York and nearly impossible to become a partner in them. These firms are so exclusive that they hire almost all their attorneys through summer associate programs and do not hire laterally. They have well-defined cultures and ways of working they want to protect. These attorneys tend to be the most specialized of all law firm attorneys. At BCG, we rank attorneys working at these firms and the firms they work at "5s". Recruiters do not make placements at these firms.
There are not many of these firms.
Diverse Practices and Opportunities in Smaller Law Firms
Other large firms will represent the largest companies in ongoing work and charge high fees to their clients but not the highest. Most of the top law school graduates will go to these firms. Many move around between them and may work at two or three or more of them as associates. Becoming a salaried partner at these firms is difficult—but not impossible. It is very difficult to become an equity partner possible if the attorney generates business. Most attorneys never become equity partners at these firms and leave early in their careers to work for corporations, quit the practice of law, or do other things. Some leave later in their careers. Many go to smaller firms. The attorneys in these larger firms tend to be quite specialized. These are your typical AmLaw-sized firms. Most recruiters spend their careers working with attorneys from these firms. These law firms try to look politically like their clients. In recent years, law firms that were primarily conservative have changed rapidly to liberal bastions to monitor the political atmosphere. At BCG Attorney Search, we call these law firms 4s.
Both 4 and 5 firms that represent large companies may make massive demands on an attorney's time and expect them to bill more than 2,000 hours a year to stay employed.
In major cities and midsized markets, a variety of firms representing smaller to midsized companies would be considered a “3”. Their billing rates are lower, and their clients are not of the size that the largest firms represent. These firms exist in most cities of more than 100,000 or so people. These firms typically pay much less than their largest firm counterparts. In addition to paying less, firms representing mid-to-smaller sized companies typically do not make the same demands on their attorneys' time. These can be pleasant places for attorneys to work provided they also have a steady flow of work. These are firms that I would classify as a "3".
Law firms ranked a "3" typically have their attorneys do multiple things within a practice area. For example, an attorney who does corporate work in a larger firm might do M&A. In a midsized firm, this same attorney would do all types of corporate work because the law firm does not have enough work, or high paying clients in the area, who demand the attorneys be so specialized.
The smaller law firms that represent primarily individuals often have lower hiring standards. They do not pay as much money—often a fraction of the largest firms—and may be run by one person. Some law firms are traditional partnerships representing insurance companies, for example, but many are not partnerships at all. Some law firms representing individuals may also represent companies. For example, an insurance defense attorney works for an insurance company that is hired to defend its clients, primarily individuals. Some smaller firms specializing in representing individuals may also represent small businesses, but not many of them.
The Traditional Mindset of Legal Recruitment
When I tried to explain to the legal recruiters in our firm the fact that they were missing out on a huge number of potential candidates, jobs, interviews, and placements by not representing attorneys not at the largest firms, with one to six or so years of experience, or with business if they had more experience than that, they could not believe it. When I tried to show them what was working, they did not want to believe it. There is nothing wrong with not wanting to believe this, or being accustomed to putting your efforts into something more likely to work (and pay more) than something less likely to work. This is how sales and business works—any person that does any sort of sales profession needs to put their time and effort into its highest valued use in a way they understand. I am not being critical of this because I also would do the same thing if I was a recruiter—I would gravitate towards what works. This is the business model of almost every permanent law firm placement recruiting firm.
A Case Study of Non-Traditional Success
Years ago, I hired an attorney to work for me who graduated in the top 3 students in his class from the University of Texas Law School. He was from Los Angeles and not interested in working for a large law firm and never worked in one. I'm not sure he did anything between his first, second, and third years of law school. He was not interested in this. Instead, he started his firm. A year or so into this, I took out an advertisement seeking an in-house counsel and ended up hiring him. He said he did not like working in an office and preferred to sit in his living room in front of his television and work on his laptop. When I told him “no," he quit after his first week. A day or so later, he called me back and we reached a truce that he would agree to come in at a certain hour and could leave by 3:00 or so each day. This was before the days of remote work. When he started working for me, I quickly realized that his work product was not great. He made lots of typos, used forms instead of writing formal motions, and many other habits I did not like. We worked on these habits, but most of them never changed. He was set in how he developed as a solo practitioner without training.
He had taken a job with me, I learned later, because he wanted to show a consistent paycheck so he could purchase a home. That was the only thing he wanted the job for. The clients he had been representing up until that point were all clients who paid in cash, so he did not show much income.
Several months into his new position, he quit and told me he would be a law professor at an unaccredited law school where he had been teaching online classes each night. I looked him up and, sure enough, there he was. I wished him good luck and felt poorly for him for leaving the law practice, but could not stop him.
I thought of him a five or so years later and, on a hunch, searched for his name. Sure enough, there he was with another one of those personal injury websites, claiming he had won massive amounts of money here and massive amounts there. I decided to try and call him on the phone. I was bounced around to a series of staff members screening my call as I was advanced higher and higher up the food chain. He had like 15 attorneys working for him and an incredibly successful firm. This was much more than I ever could have given him or any large law firm would have given him working up until that point in his career. He had succeeded beyond his wildest expectations—and mine—by pursuing a different sort of path. He was happy, quite rich, not stressed out, felt important, and living a great life.
Final Thoughts
My advice for anyone interested in only working in a large law firm is that this is not the only option—or always the option that will make you the most successful, or the happiest. Most attorneys in practice areas serving individuals are not as concerned with the opinions of others as those who serve corporations. When you are working for corporations, you need to make sure you adopt the demeanor of the executives and those who hire you. You need to act how the law firm expects you to act. You need to be concerned with others because others' opinions can make or break your career. You also will make what they tell you that you should make. Leave or stay when they tell you to do so. Represent the clients they tell you that you can and cannot. Work in the city and office they tell you to. Behave how they tell you to. Retire when they tell you and more.
In most cases, this is a continuation of relying on the opinions of others that started for many before law school, during law school, and after law school. My point here—and this is the only point—is that this is not always the correct decision for many attorneys. Many times, it is going to work for the little guy and not the big company that is the road to happiness.
