Seriously, how important are Vault rankings? Forum

[whysoseriousbiglaw]

My sense is it matters a lot for exit purposes. I'm at a V30 firm, but one that is Band 1 in my Chambers practice area. I've gotten a couple in-house nibbles, but that's it. My wife is at V5 firm on the other hand, and gets 2-3 recruiters from Apple, Google, Amazon, etc... asking her to go in-house.

Chambers stuff might matter more for lateral opportunities, but anecdotally, it seems to have a real impact for stuff outside of law firms.

There are 7 attorneys I know who are at, were at, or were recruited by at least one of these companies (and each company is represented). None of them worked at a V5, and only one was at a V10. All of them did work for firms that were known to have good practices in the respective areas in which they worked or for which they were recruited.

By the way, how do you know it is important to the company, as opposed to the recruiter? Is the recruiter an employee of the company?

Yes, I know at least a couple of those companies have recruiters (as employees of the company, not third party recruiters) who actively solicit people.

Doesn't mean it's not a shit place to work though.

[84651846190]

Vault rankings matter for equity partners (because you generally make a lot more money at higher ranked firms than lower ranked firms). Also, the top Vault firms have historically been less prone to laying people off (although query whether this is true recently or will be in the future). Generally, you don't have to worry as much about having a steady flow of work at a higher-ranked firm.

For corporate, there are better (more important?) deals that get you connections with big banks and other places that pay relatively higher in house salaries.

For litigation, you're better off going to a trial boutique or somewhere where you can get courtroom experience early in your career rather than a highly-ranked Vault firm. In most cases, it's just too hard to work your way up from doc review to lead trial counsel in highly-ranked biglaw firms. The leverage is just too high and competition is too stiff for you to have a good shot at making it.

[patentlitigatrix]

Viewing it from a happiness/content-ness perspective, it depends on how much you care about prestige. If that actually makes you happy, maybe Vault ranking should be important. But if you just want a job that you like/can tolerate, there are plenty of firms out there that are lower ranked or unranked (esp. mid-size and small firms) that do good work, are well-regarded, and where you'd arguably get more experience.

As for partners, yeah they generally make more at higher ranked firms. But if you don't have a realistic shot at making partner, and there isn't really a senior counsel/non-partner track, that is sort of moot for associates deciding where to go.

[Anonymous User]

So which is it that are calling your wife? That was my question--I could have been more clear. I know they have recruiters. I haven't talked to the internal recruiters, but I have had recruiters who worked for recruiting companies call me. They played up the fact that I was at a V10.

Based on watching the process first hand several times, I really don't think the companies care that much about the vault ranking. I think it is frequently about whether you have done work for the company (or perhaps a lot of work in the industry) and whether someone they trust can vouch for your skills. Maybe if you go the outside recruiter route, the vault rank matters more because the recruiter views vault ranking as a proxy for abilities. Even still, I think they'd prefer to present a candidate that did work for the company.