Challenging Prestige Perceptions in Different Legal Practice Settings
Description
In this webinar, Harrison delves into a topic of great importance, one that he's never discussed in public before. This presentation challenges traditional perceptions surrounding legal practice and offers invaluable insights for various types of legal professionals. Harrison's extensive experience, spanning 25 years of observing successful and content attorneys, enables him to provide a unique perspective on the legal profession. He addresses a fundamental question that many legal practitioners grapple with: Where should they work to achieve the most fulfillment and success in their careers? The webinar dissects two significant options for legal professionals: working at law firms representing individuals or law firms serving companies. Harrison highlights the stark contrast between these two spectrums of law firms. While companies pay more, leading to higher salaries, there's an expectation for attorneys to match specific qualifications, including class rank and law school attended. The crux becomes evident as Harrison explains that working at prestigious law firms serving companies is only sometimes the best route for long-term career satisfaction. There's a prevailing presumption that these firms are superior, resulting in attorneys from other law firms feeling inferior. However, Harrison challenges this notion, revealing that it only sometimes makes sense to strive for the most prestigious firms. Harrison's recent realization, which he shares with the audience, disrupts the traditional recruiting orthodoxy that often prioritizes the most prestigious law schools and firms. He explains why this approach may not benefit attorneys long term and why focusing on specific years of experience is critical. The presentation ultimately encourages legal professionals to reconsider their perceptions of success in the legal field and provides valuable information on how to make more informed career choices. Harrison's insights promise to reshape how attorneys approach their careers and the firms they choose, potentially leading to greater happiness, financial security, and overall career satisfaction.
Alright, let's get started. This webinar is crucial, one of the most important anyone could attend. I've never talked about this topic publicly, so it's exciting. It's valuable for those in major law firms questioning if it's the best fit and for those in smaller firms wondering about larger ones. It will challenge your understanding of working in a law firm.
Observations today stem from 25 years of watching successful, happy attorneys. It will surprise you and potentially change your career trajectory. Understanding this can lead to more money, freedom, and security. Many miss these aspects in different settings, and this is the key to altering your career direction. In the search for law firm positions, there are two major options: law firms representing individuals and law firms representing companies. The latter pays more due to companies having more resources. Class rank and law school background matter more in firms serving companies than those serving individuals.
Law firms serving individuals often lack knowledge about various legal distinctions. Now, let's briefly touch on distinctions in law firms. This is a live webinar, and after the discussion, feel free to ask questions. Reflecting on the past, I recall working for a federal district judge, handling a class action involving former employees of Banana Pickers against Dow Chemical. There were various law firms involved, from prestigious to smaller ones. The prestige associated with larger firms puzzled me.
There's an unwarranted reverence for attorneys in big law firms. Attorneys from less prestigious firms often aspire to move up, while those in more prestigious firms rarely consider moving down. This perception is flawed, and I'll explain why shortly. Law students and firms assume that representing companies is more prestigious and offers better opportunities. Attorneys not in these firms often feel inferior, thinking they're missing out. However, none of these assumptions hold true.
Over the years, I've realized that attorneys representing individuals or smaller firms can be just as successful and happy. The recruiting field used to prioritize candidates from top law schools and big firms. Deviating from this norm was discouraged. Let's challenge these assumptions about success in the legal field. Firms behave this way because they represent companies that demand high-quality representation. However, this mindset eliminates most attorneys from the market. Even if an attorney is from a top law firm, they may face challenges after six or seven years of experience.
After this period, large firms often lose interest unless the attorney brings in substantial business. This reality is disheartening for senior associates who struggle to secure opportunities beyond major law firms. In conclusion, the game changes after six or seven years, and even major law firms may no longer be viable options unless you bring significant business. It's essential to rethink success in the legal field and not fall into the trap of prioritizing prestige over true fulfillment.
If you're a giant company that these law firms need, why give business to an associate? After six or seven years, they might make you an associate indefinitely, but not many do. Once you outlive your use at most large law firms, you're pushed aside, and younger models replace you. I'm not criticizing large law firms; it's the model that's always been there.
Initially developed by Cravath, Serena, Moore in the 1950s, other large law firms, like Cravath, started structuring their business-like companies such as IBM. Cravath became very successful, and other firms copied this business model. This model has persisted through generations of attorneys. Today, I'll share experiences watching attorneys in different practice settings, their success, happiness, self-confidence, and career longevity beyond six or seven years.
Let's start with divorce attorneys. Interestingly, divorce attorneys at BCG get more interviews than those trying to move between large law firms. A divorce attorney I encountered had left a prestigious litigation firm, Quinn Emanuel, to become a divorce attorney. He found it a no-brainer; billing $600 an hour with a thriving practice.
Contrast this with a brief stint at Wasserman Comden, a high-profile firm with stringent client requirements. They expected clients with millions in liquid assets. Unlike my wife's attorneys, these attorneys were graduates from local law schools, yet they thrived. Bruce Wasser, realizing my financial situation, suggested I needed a Ford, not a Ferrari for my divorce. This attorney billed $600 an hour, showing enthusiasm and confidence.
In contrast, large law firm attorneys, even partners with substantial business, face insecurity. One partner panicked as his work slowed down, jeopardizing his one-client business. In large firms, job security is a mirage. I've seen partners fired for wearing jeans on a casual day or having an affair with a staff member. Attorneys can lose business, face compensation reduction, or even forced retirement at 65. Large law firms operate like large corporations, offering a stable yet precarious environment. It's essential to consider the risks and rewards when navigating your legal career.
If you're a giant company that these law firms need, why give business to an associate? After six or seven years, they may make you an associate indefinitely, but not many do. Once you outlive your use at most large law firms, you're pushed aside. Younger models or business-minded models take your place. I'm not criticizing large law firms; it's the business model, developed by Cravath, Serena, Moore in the 1950s.
I'll share experiences watching attorneys in different practice settings, gauging success, happiness, self-confidence, and career longevity beyond six or seven years. Not just about quality-of-life issues, but also hours, stress, and challenges faced in large law firms. Personal experiences with divorce attorneys reveal their success. Divorce attorneys at BCG get more interviews than those trying to move between large law firms. A divorce attorney, once a senior associate at a top litigation firm, switched for better business opportunities. He left billing 600 hours an hour and quickly built a successful practice in divorce law.
I had a brief experience with a high-end law firm, Wasserman Comden. They demanded clients with substantial liquid assets, revealing a stark contrast. Local law school graduates represented me, exuding enthusiasm and confidence not seen in most large law firm attorneys. Bruce Wasser, realizing my financial condition, suggested a more affordable attorney. This attorney billed 600 an hour but had a diverse clientele, unlike the high-stakes, one-client scenario seen in some large law firms. Divorce attorneys seemed happier, with diversified businesses and less risk of sudden job loss.
Large law firms come with instability and risk. Job security is a concern; even successful partners can face sudden job loss due to various reasons. Instances include partners fired for wearing jeans or having an affair with a staff member. Losing business may lead to reduced compensation, loss of equity, and deadlines to find a new position.
Some law firms mandate retirement at 65, limiting career longevity. Losing business or facing complaints can brand individuals as toxic, leading to the end of their careers. While not stating that large law firms are inherently bad, it's essential to recognize the corporate-like dynamics, emphasizing the need to understand the working dynamics when associated with such firms.
Attorneys in various fields must conform to a party line, mirroring corporate America's dynamics. For instance, a friend, a high-ranking NFL official, faced consequences for merely driving players to a strip club. Corporate cultures demand caution, especially for associates who live on the edge of job security within large law firms.
Associates risk job loss when firms slow down or when their seniors falter. While large law firms offer financial rewards and prestige, they lack job security and hinder client acquisition for associates. Conflicts arise from stringent checks, complicating the establishment of a client base. However, there are advantages, such as higher earnings, the chance to represent major companies, and robust support structures.
Transitioning to attorneys serving individuals reveals a different landscape. Personal injury, immigration, and family law are examples. Successful attorneys often work independently, showcasing satisfaction and security. Examples include an immigration attorney with a $20 million yearly practice and a personal injury attorney grossing $3 million from a $10 million book.
Individual-serving attorneys experience joy, financial success, and work-life balance, unlike many large firm counterparts. Personal connections, freedom, and health become evident. Such individuals often outperform counterparts in large law firms, attaining success without the constraints of corporate structures. Personal injury attorneys, for instance, enjoy prosperity, freedom, and well-being, standing in stark contrast to the corporate legal landscape.
The shift to individual-serving practice areas offers diverse paths to success. It challenges the notion that large law firms are the sole route to happiness and fulfillment in legal careers. Legal recruiters traditionally court large firms but face challenges in predicting fluctuations in corporate legal needs. Large law firms go through cycles of expansion and contraction, impacting attorney job security and longevity within the organization.
Large law firms lay off attorneys during contractions, applying strict criteria for rehiring. Even if an attorney meets the qualifications, long-term tenure within such firms remains challenging. Leaving a large law firm opens doors to in-house positions or smaller firms but rarely to starting an independent practice. Large corporations prefer the brand association with well-established law firms, discouraging individuals from representing them.
Criticism of large law firms is not the objective; rather, the focus is on presenting alternative paths in the legal profession. Understanding that large law firms are just one of many options contributes to a healthier perspective on legal careers. Attorneys can find happiness, success, and fulfillment beyond the confines of large law firms, similar to how not every tennis player reaches Wimbledon but still finds value and accomplishment in their chosen field.
In my work, I collaborate with various types of attorneys, including those from large law firms. With decades of experience, I've honed my expertise, continually improving. Recently, I've extended my focus to attorneys specializing in company or individual-facing work, such as insurance defense, family law, personal injury, trust and estates, immigration, and other areas.
Recruiters in my firm, like others in the industry, often overlook these attorneys due to a deviation from the traditional business model. While our team still collaborates with top-tier attorneys, I find satisfaction in working with those overlooked by other recruiters. Early in my career, a coach advised me to delegate leads to retain recruiters. Consequently, my involvement with high-quality candidates has decreased, but I maintain a presence.
Consumer-facing law, as opposed to corporate law, offers unique opportunities. Attorneys in these areas are highly marketable, with a demand from law firms in both large and small markets. Advertising through billboards, online platforms, social media, radio, and TV can effectively attract clients. Unlike the competitive landscape of major law firms, consumer-facing attorneys can thrive in any market size.
Entering large law firms presents challenges due to intense competition. Positions often require residing in major cities, leading to long commutes and significant barriers for entry. In contrast, consumer-facing attorneys enjoy more flexibility in choosing their work location and building a successful practice.
Large law firms provide a comprehensive education in legal practice, emphasizing detail and precision. However, they often neglect teaching attorneys how to start their own business. Consumer-facing attorneys, on the other hand, gain practical business knowledge and can establish lasting careers with steady employment.
Attorneys transitioning in-house face uncertainties, with frequent changes based on corporate shifts. Consumer-facing attorneys possess a more stable employment outlook, maintaining a consistent flow of clients. Seniority in large law firms without business development skills can lead to challenges, impacting self-confidence and job security.
Leaving large law firms doesn't always mean entering in-house roles. Attorneys may choose smaller law firms, adapting to the change in prestige and income. Some leave the legal profession altogether, showcasing the diverse paths attorneys may take.
When attorneys realize they won't stay in a large law firm, they face issues moving to smaller firms. Smaller firms hesitate to hire those who seem superior. Attorneys may avoid undesirable jobs, fearing perceptions from peers in large firms. Some start unrelated businesses, driven by perceived good ideas rather than experience or interest. This pattern is observed in resumes and conversations with attorneys.
Attorneys, especially males marrying young, appear enthusiastic but face increasing stress over time. Traumatic experiences occur when large law firm decisions end, leading to divorces. Attorneys regret their invested career time, struggling with mortgages. Patterns of regret and anger emerge when facing problematic job searches. Divorces often stem from realization that their next job poses challenges.
Not every attorney follows this pattern, but a significant proportion does. By the time these events unfold, less qualified attorneys with consumer-facing law firms thrive. They build successful careers without the stress of working for others. Consumer-facing attorneys enjoy confidence, happiness, and success, visible in thriving businesses.
While not discrediting success in large law firms, the path is demanding, requiring intelligence, motivation, billable hours, and business generation. Politics, likability, and adherence to corporate image are essential. It's a tougher route, with challenges in advancement and potential job loss.
Aspiring attorneys often associate success with large law firms, equating prestige and income. However, opportunities lie in consumer-facing law firms, offering valuable learning experiences. Working in smaller firms allows understanding successful marketing strategies and case management.
Consumer-facing attorneys often reach greater heights than their large firm counterparts. The contrast is evident in success stories, with confident attorneys enjoying vacations and financial stability. The narrative challenges the notion that success lies solely in large law firms.
While acknowledging large law firm success stories, consumer-facing law firms offer an alternative path. Starting or joining such firms provides autonomy, direct rewards, and avoidance of corporate politics. Learning the business and gaining insights into successful marketing contribute to long-term success. There's an alternative path to success outside large law firms. Consumer-facing law firms offer opportunities for learning, growth, and financial success. It's a narrative challenging the conventional belief in large law firm superiority, emphasizing individual growth and business success.
There are numerous law firms in the legal landscape, and many of them may not be familiar to you. These firms, particularly the smaller ones often referred to as "threes," can serve as highly advantageous workplaces for attorneys. Their operational dynamics distinguish them in several key aspects, making them attractive options for legal professionals seeking diverse and rewarding career paths.
One notable characteristic of these smaller firms is their consistent workflow. Unlike larger counterparts, they maintain a steady influx of cases. This factor contributes to a more predictable work environment, allowing attorneys to manage their workload efficiently. Furthermore, these firms typically adopt lower billing rates, steering clear of excessive markup practices commonly observed in larger entities.
Attorneys at smaller firms engage in multifaceted roles within their practices. In contrast to the specialized focus often found in large firms, where an attorney might exclusively handle mergers and acquisitions (M&A), those at midsize or smaller firms delve into broader areas. For example, a midsize firm attorney may undertake general corporate work due to the firm's diversified client base.
The rationale behind this diversified approach lies in the smaller firms' unique position. They may lack the volume of work or high-profile clients that necessitate specialization. Consequently, attorneys in these settings enjoy a varied professional experience, enhancing their adaptability and skill set. It's crucial to note that not all smaller firms follow the same structure. Some may operate as traditional partnerships, while others deviate from this model. For instance, insurance defense firms often adopt this approach, representing companies while being structured as traditional partnerships. However, many smaller firms operate outside the partnership framework altogether.
Despite their potential benefits, these smaller firms often face oversight from recruiters, who tend to prioritize large law firm experience. This prevailing belief underscores the importance of recognizing the value of diverse legal experiences beyond the confines of major firms. Reflecting on a past experience, an attorney was hired despite never having worked in a large law firm. Graduating among the top three in their class from the University of Texas Law School, this individual opted for an unconventional path. Preferring to work from home and engaging in personal pursuits, such as video gaming, they eventually started their own firm. Interestingly, this attorney's story took a turn when they responded to an advertisement seeking in-house counsel. Despite unconventional work habits, the attorney was hired. However, their approach to legal practice remained unorthodox, characterized by typos and a lack of formal motions. The attorney eventually left the position to become a law professor at an unaccredited law school.
This narrative serves as a testament to the varied and sometimes unconventional trajectories attorneys can take in their careers. It challenges the prevailing notion that success is exclusively tied to large law firm experiences. The attorney, despite not conforming to traditional norms, found success in a personal injury practice.
This example emphasizes the broader point that success in the legal profession is not confined to a specific career trajectory. Attorneys can thrive in smaller firms and alternative career paths, achieving both personal fulfillment and financial success. The key lies in recognizing and embracing the diverse opportunities available within the legal landscape. The legal profession offers a spectrum of career paths beyond the confines of large law firms. Attorneys should consider the unique advantages offered by smaller firms, acknowledging the potential for diverse experiences and personal fulfillment. Success in the legal field is not a one-size-fits-all proposition, and exploring alternative paths can lead to a more satisfying and balanced career journey.
QUESTIONS:
Alright, let's return to the webinar. Give me a moment to open Q&A. Lots of questions here. By the way, when asking questions, your names won't be shown if you're logged into Zoom or another platform. Feel free to ask anything.
Considering your insights into attorney career progression, can you advise on balancing short-term career goals with long-term aspirations in practice areas and job opportunities? Attorneys usually focus on two types of law in large firms—litigation, which opens doors to family law, personal injury, and employment plaintiff's work, and transactional areas like corporate. Bankruptcy is another option. Environmental, immigration, and real estate law offer diverse paths.
For those aiming to eventually start their own firm or set up for success, consider gaining experience in these areas. Large law firms, despite drawbacks, provide valuable training. Don't prioritize salary early in your career; focus on learning.
Thanks for the presentation. As a nontraditional student, I aim to start a niche consumer-facing firm. Law firms teach how to practice law, but how can a law graduate with entrepreneurial intentions learn to successfully serve individuals?
Consumer-facing law, like personal injury or family law, may not require the depth of skills demanded by large firms. You can start such firms with minimal training. Numerous resources, including online courses and forums, exist to guide you in running a business, marketing, and practicing law.
How can candidates from less prestigious law schools navigate employment in high-profile law firms effectively?
Graduating from a top law school may give you an edge, but it's not the only factor. Work harder to prove yourself, be aware of potential vulnerabilities, and recognize that intellectual firepower matters. If you lack the same level of intelligence, consider environments where you can excel rather than compete directly with those from top-tier schools. Titles matter; ensure your role in a firm reflects your skills and aspirations. Choose an environment where you can thrive and stand out.
I recall my deep interest in personal injury law during my time in law school. I traveled the country and authored a book, although poorly written, focusing on personal injury lawyers and my observations. I noted that many successful practitioners were not top performers in law school but possessed great passion. This highlights the varying importance of certain qualities in different practice areas.
Addressing your question about who can succeed in these roles, success is not confined to graduates of top law schools. Exceptions exist, such as patent attorneys with scientific backgrounds excelling in niche areas like healthcare law. Family law, immigration, and employment-related fields are also viable options, with slightly lower entry barriers.
Certain practice areas, like ERISA and employee benefits, may require additional qualifications like an LLM. Corporate-related roles are attainable with specialized training. It's crucial to understand that qualifications matter in large law firms, and attorneys in such firms are keenly aware of each other's credentials.
While prestigious law schools may not be a strict prerequisite, excellent academic performance remains crucial for securing positions in large law firms. Attorneys lacking outstanding academic records may face challenges. My intention is not to discourage but to provide realistic insights into the competitive nature of large law firms.
If working in a prestigious firm is your goal, motivation is key. A story of a Chicago woman's journey illustrates that determination and continuous improvement can overcome initial disadvantages. Over time, she secured a position in a highly respected law firm by consistently enhancing her skills and client base.
Moving on to your next question about resources for finding opportunities in legal practices like writing, entrepreneurship, or education outside traditional roles, Law Crossing is a platform I operate that caters to non-traditional legal jobs. Job boards and networking can also help, particularly in seeking advice from professionals already in those fields.
Finding opportunities in legal entrepreneurship or education may involve reaching out directly to practitioners in those areas. Networking, contacting professionals, and seeking guidance from those who have succeeded in your desired field can be invaluable.
Assessing the long-term growth potential of smaller firms compared to larger ones is a nuanced process. While starting your career at a reputable firm is advisable, evaluating practice areas within those firms becomes crucial. For example, family law practitioners should aim for positions with the best professionals in that market. Keep in mind that Brexit procedures may influence the legal landscape, so staying informed about industry trends is essential.
Securing the best possible job early in your career and continuously seeking improvement are essential strategies. Networking, seeking advice from successful professionals, and staying informed about industry trends will contribute to long-term success in the legal field.
We were the best attorneys, the best firm in the market, and same with every practice area. Everything you're doing is learning. At a big firm, you're learning a certain way of thinking and approaching problems. When you start a consumer-facing practice, you're learning business—how to get work and practice in that area. So, anyone going to work in a consumer-facing practice area should understand that you're trying to learn how to do the work and build a business eventually.
When applying to any law firm, large or small, connections matter. Law firms look for meaningful connections with decision-makers. Resumes are often reviewed in the first few days of posting a job, so making a personal connection can set you apart. Whether it's walking into an office or leaving a compelling voicemail, getting the attention of decision-makers is crucial.
Transitioning to a smaller firm involves making connections with people who can help you. Personal connections play a significant role in hiring decisions. Social media and sending resumes are not enough; genuine connections make a difference.
Meaningful work can vary between large and small law firms. Large firms offer exposure to sophisticated work and smart colleagues, making you a better attorney. Small firms provide opportunities to learn the business side and can lead to more passionate work. Consider your long-term career goals and job satisfaction when evaluating the trade-off between prestige and meaningful work.
For large niche firms lacking high-profile cases, effective communication of expertise is key. Emphasize results and how you help clients. Marketing strategies vary, so examine what other attorneys are doing and build from there.
When positioning yourself to legal recruiters for serving less affluent clients, define one practice area where you appear as an expert. Recruiters are interested in specialists, not generalists, so focus on standing out in one area to get noticed.
Law firms specializing in motorcycle and truck accidents can limit your options. BCG's diverse practice areas offer better opportunities. Specificity in your practice area enhances your chances. BCG's homepage displays various practice areas and skilled professionals.
GPA concerns due to family events may not matter for consumer-facing firms or after a few years post-law school. Overcome GPA challenges by targeting firms that don't prioritize GPA. Justifying a lower GPA due to personal reasons might not be effective. Employers focus on practice areas and firm quality rather than GPA for experienced professionals. BCG lists 300 practice areas, emphasizing the importance of your chosen field and firm reputation.
Top law school graduates may face challenges in small firms where colleagues feel intimidated. Downplay your law school background, focusing on learning from others and building practical skills. Law school prestige matters less in practice; performance and client care are crucial.
Avoid flaunting your law school pedigree, as it won't necessarily benefit you in the long run. Small law firms provide valuable business insights; learn on the job to succeed. Be likable and let performance speak for itself; law school identity becomes irrelevant.
Don't let a prestigious law school hinder your success in smaller firms. Colleagues may try to prove themselves, so remain humble and concentrate on performance. Law school might open doors but won't define your success. Thanks for joining; see you next week!
