Weil NY v. Kirkland NY Forum

[Anonymous User]

I am deciding between Weil NY and Kirkland NY. I'm corporate focused -- possibly m&a or PE. Which would you choose? Any provides better exit opportunities? Any input would be great and thank you!

[Anonymous User]

Bump - Im actually curious about this too!

[Anonymous User]

This is purely a culture fit. Both are v10s and are elite firms, with Kirkland doing increasingly strong in the recent years, but on a scale that will probably not affect you. They are almost polar opposites in terms of culture, so go with where you like the people more. I'd say Weil, unless the Kirkland nature appeals to you.

[Anonymous User]

This is purely a culture fit. Both are v10s and are elite firms, with Kirkland doing increasingly strong in the recent years, but on a scale that will probably not affect you. They are almost polar opposites in terms of culture, so go with where you like the people more. I'd say Weil, unless the Kirkland nature appeals to you.

do you mind elaborating on the culture bit? particularly Weil. I didn't get the sense that Weil had as much of a defining culture as KE does. does it? or are we just saying it's culture is "not KE"?

[Anonymous User]

Weil has a laid back and quirky reputation. Kirkland is very eat or be eaten.

[Anonymous User]

do you mind elaborating on the culture bit? particularly Weil. I didn't get the sense that Weil had as much of a defining culture as KE does. does it? or are we just saying it's culture is "not KE"?

Not the previous anon, but I don't think Weil has a particularly strong culture. But "not KE" is a pretty big differentiator to me given KE's very strong sink-or-swim culture.

[Anonymous User]

Not sure why everyone in my class at my school wants to work at Kirkland - seems miserable

[Anonymous User]

Not sure why everyone in my class at my school wants to work at Kirkland - seems miserable

You gotta give KE props - its current/future associates tend to really drink the kool-aid. Part of it may be that Kirkland selects for more aggressive folks.

[Anonymous User]

Unless you really love Kirkland, I'd say go with Weil. I have friends that worked at both and universally Kirkland is known as a pretty shitty place to be an associate. Not to say Weil isn't super intense also, but I found the people to be pretty nice considering how smart and competent everyone is. Everyone I've ever worked with at Kirkland has been pretty awful.

[Anonymous User]

Weil has a laid back and quirky reputation. Kirkland is very eat or be eaten.

What's this based on? You know a lot of associates being "eaten" at Kirkland?

[Anonymous User]

Weil has a laid back and quirky reputation. Kirkland is very eat or be eaten.

What's this based on? You know a lot of associates being "eaten" at Kirkland?

?? Not the anon who posted that but is this a serious question? Whether you enjoy Kirkland's free market system or not (either as an employee or outsider), this is a silly battle to choose and act difficult about. Everybody knows what he/she means, and everybody knows the extent of its validity (fluctuates depending on what you thrive in), which obviously goes back to the initial question of culture fit.

[Anonymous User]

Weil has a laid back and quirky reputation. Kirkland is very eat or be eaten.

What's this based on? You know a lot of associates being "eaten" at Kirkland?

?? Not the anon who posted that but is this a serious question? Whether you enjoy Kirkland's free market system or not (either as an employee or outsider), this is a silly battle to choose and act difficult about. Everybody knows what he/she means, and everybody knows the extent of its validity (fluctuates depending on what you thrive in), which obviously goes back to the initial question of culture fit.

What's the real downside to the free market? Are highly sought after assignments at other firms really being handed out randomly amongst the associate class? Also, is this an issue when there's so much work going around?

I've always considered elite NYC big law to be shitty all over and that the S&C/Skadden/Kirkland shitty place to work rep and the super nice place to work rep of DPW/Cleary/Debevoise to be way overstated.

[Anonymous User]

Picture all the gunners in your class. And then imagine all the coldcalls/reading for your class was a free market assignment system, and the more readings/coldcalls you sign up for, the better you do in class.

Imagine instead of the free market system, the professor assigned panels for cold calls. And your grade is correlated to just whatever the professor assigned you.

Gibson reaches a balance through a variety of mechanisms (lockstep bonus/partner ratio/people they hire), but what you see at Kirkland is definitely not the norm and not something where you can just discount and mislead people into thinking they're all the same.

Also personally Debevoise seems like I'd suffocate in the passive aggressive silence so definitely distinguishing qualities in each firm.

[Anonymous User]

Picture all the gunners in your class. And then imagine all the coldcalls/reading for your class was a free market assignment system, and the more readings/coldcalls you sign up for, the better you do in class.

Imagine instead of the free market system, the professor assigned panels for cold calls. And your grade is correlated to just whatever the professor assigned you.

Gibson reaches a balance through a variety of mechanisms (lockstep bonus/partner ratio/people they hire), but what you see at Kirkland is definitely not the norm and not something where you can just discount and mislead people into thinking they're all the same.

Also personally Debevoise seems like I'd suffocate in the passive aggressive silence so definitely distinguishing qualities in each firm.

Curious, are you a law student or an associate? I’m starting as an associate at a peer firm and genuinely expect all this places to suck balls.

[Anonymous User]

Evaluating these two as well.

Wondering if the general dislike of "fratty" firms, "free market" assignment systems, etc., stems from internet chat boards being a self-selecting population of introverts that don't/won't thrive in those types of systems. In an alternate universe where these boards are populated by a more outgoing segment of law school, I wonder if the general tone/tenor with regards to culture issues would be flipped.

[Anonymous User]

The nice thing about a traditional assignment system is that it doesn't preclude you from seeking out the work you want, but you don't have to rely entirely on eating what you kill to survive.

[Anonymous User]

Evaluating these two as well.

Wondering if the general dislike of "fratty" firms, "free market" assignment systems, etc., stems from internet chat boards being a self-selecting population of introverts that don't/won't thrive in those types of systems. In an alternate universe where these boards are populated by a more outgoing segment of law school, I wonder if the general tone/tenor with regards to culture issues would be flipped.

I don't think folks are bashing Kirkland ITT so much as simply highlighting its "free market max" culture, which IMO should be a very important consideration to anyone thinking about joining Kirkland. A competitive, hungry law student reading this thread would likely jump at the chance to join KE.

[Anonymous User]

Picture all the gunners in your class. And then imagine all the coldcalls/reading for your class was a free market assignment system, and the more readings/coldcalls you sign up for, the better you do in class.

Imagine instead of the free market system, the professor assigned panels for cold calls. And your grade is correlated to just whatever the professor assigned you.

Gibson reaches a balance through a variety of mechanisms (lockstep bonus/partner ratio/people they hire), but what you see at Kirkland is definitely not the norm and not something where you can just discount and mislead people into thinking they're all the same.

Also personally Debevoise seems like I'd suffocate in the passive aggressive silence so definitely distinguishing qualities in each firm.

This is so funny. The "free market system" or "open assignment system" or whatever its called these days just means there's no central work coordinator, i.e., you can control what types of deals you work on and who with, unlike at these "nice" firms. Partners are incentivized to not be dicks because you can say no to work. And to all those "obviously, you can't really say no" responses, yes, you can and absolutely have to. Like all these other really good firms, K&E is really busy, so I say no 5 times for every time I say yes - half the time because I'm just too busy already and the other half because the deal/team isn't something I want to join.

There's definitely culture differences between all firms, and OP should do some second looks and do what's best for her/him, but this stereotype that K&E's associates are eating what they kill needs to be retired already. It's stale and the only people pushing it don't know what they're talking about.

[Anonymous User]

Having just lateralled to Kirkland from a white shoe V5, I was blown away by how you can say no to work. Partners make an effort to “sell” you on their deals. At my old firm you’d get a call from assignment coordinator and they say “you are doing this deal.” There are for sure downsides to free market but this one surprised me.

[Anonymous User]

Having just lateralled to Kirkland from a white shoe V5, I was blown away by how you can say no to work. Partners make an effort to “sell” you on their deals. At my old firm you’d get a call from assignment coordinator and they say “you are doing this deal.” There are for sure downsides to free market but this one surprised me.

Given your experience at both the white shoe v5 and Kirkland, can you go on to describe any other differences that are a result of the free market and generally the people at the firm?

[Anonymous User]

Evaluating these two as well.

Wondering if the general dislike of "fratty" firms, "free market" assignment systems, etc., stems from internet chat boards being a self-selecting population of introverts that don't/won't thrive in those types of systems. In an alternate universe where these boards are populated by a more outgoing segment of law school, I wonder if the general tone/tenor with regards to culture issues would be flipped.

I don't think folks are bashing Kirkland ITT so much as simply highlighting its "free market max" culture, which IMO should be a very important consideration to anyone thinking about joining Kirkland. A competitive, hungry law student reading this thread would likely jump at the chance to join KE.

Yup, agree no one ITT is "bashing" Kirkland--merely sharing their views/preferences. Still can't help but imagine there's some percentage chance that the personality drawn to message boards might be more introverted, and be turned off by firms who place a premium on more "corporate", outgoing, gregarious personalities and staff deals accordingly.

[Anonymous User]

Having just lateralled to Kirkland from a white shoe V5, I was blown away by how you can say no to work. Partners make an effort to “sell” you on their deals. At my old firm you’d get a call from assignment coordinator and they say “you are doing this deal.” There are for sure downsides to free market but this one surprised me.

Given your experience at both the white shoe v5 and Kirkland, can you go on to describe any other differences that are a result of the free market and generally the people at the firm?

There’s a lot to say here. Happy to discuss live if you want to post a throwaway email.

I think the biggest takeaway is that Kirkland is unabashedly managed like a business in any other industry, while my old firm was managed much more like a traditional partnership. There are only a handful of firms like that left. The difference shows up in so many different ways.

But the culture shift is really felt in that Kirkland only cares about pleasing clients and growing their business. My old firm fundamentally cares about getting the “right” answer, with the understanding the doing so will ultimately generate (or retain) business. You can see this difference manifest in how partners review your docs, how client conflicts are managed, how partners are compensated, etc. It’s everywhere. It’s just a different outlook on the practice of law.

I’m honestly not sure which one is better. Probably just turns on your own preferences. Kirkland gives junior lawyers more opportunity to be entrepreneurial. If you can generate revenue and impress clients, they will support you. But if you can’t, even after you have shares, good luck. Most firms are like Kirkland, at the end of the day, and Kirkland is doing a better job than them at adjusting to the new legal economy.