Top Law Schools

Do law firms pay at all for an MBA, even a part-time one?

I'm not an expert, but my guess would be no....

alltheway wrote:Do law firms pay at all for an MBA, even a part-time one?

Not unless you can sell it to them as a potential benefit. Lawyers tend to think little of the MBA, so I'd say you'll have a difficult time making your case.

Some firms do give a seniority credit and bonus for JD/MBA's. You'd have to ask individual firms whether they do it.

quakeroats wrote:

alltheway wrote:Do law firms pay at all for an MBA, even a part-time one?

[TLS Users] tend to think little of the MBA, so I'd say you'll have a difficult time making your case [here].

Fixed.

XxSpyKEx wrote:

quakeroats wrote:

alltheway wrote:Do law firms pay at all for an MBA, even a part-time one?

[TLS Users] tend to think little of the MBA, so I'd say you'll have a difficult time making your case [here].

Fixed.

Also true. But that is based on sound evidence. Several headhunters/hiring partners I've spoken with have echoed the concern that a JD/MBA = someone who won't practice law more than 2 years before taking a non-legal corporate/banking gig

I know a couple people who went in-house and then get their MBAs paid for, but that's different.

sure they do - $160k per year is more than enough for your evening mba tuition

Renzo wrote:

XxSpyKEx wrote:

quakeroats wrote:

alltheway wrote:Do law firms pay at all for an MBA, even a part-time one?

[TLS Users] tend to think little of the MBA, so I'd say you'll have a difficult time making your case [here].

Fixed.

Also true. But that is based on sound evidence. Several headhunters/hiring partners I've spoken with have echoed the concern that a JD/MBA = someone who won't practice law more than 2 years before taking a non-legal corporate/banking gig

A joint degree is different than someone who works on an MBA after beginning work at a law firm (and I don't think the reason law firms that don't pay for a transactional attorney to get an MBA is because they are worried that the attorney will leave to take a non-legal corporate/banking gig). It's hard to argue that some understanding of basic business, such as accounting and finance is worthless for a transactional attorney. However, most law schools have these courses, or at least allow law students to take some courses in their business school, so it is completely realistic to take all the courses you need in your 3 years of law school. The problem is that most law students don't do that.

i understand law firm is different from from corp law BUT: i spoke with the general counsel of Marathon Oil when i lived in ohio, and he said they paid for his MBA to Harvard.

Cmoss wrote:i understand law firm is different from from corp law BUT: i spoke with the general counsel of Marathon Oil when i lived in ohio, and he said they paid for his MBA to Harvard.

Sounds more like a GC getting his MBA covered which is a different worm can and is probably much more common.

The law firm I worked at in NYC would pay for some classes after you worked there for two years. However, you could only take one class a semester and you had to fill out an enormous pile of paper work about why that single class will help you do your current job better and get it approved by a dozen or so people. They would not pay for any classes that you had to take a leave of absence from work for.

So... maybe, if you do it a class at a time on top of your required billable hours.

If you think about labor relations in BigLaw, the answer to this question is obvious:

BigLaw doesn't invest in associates. New associates at BigLaw firms churn in and out until after 3-5 years they are either asked to leave or decide on their own to GTFO.

Since you are not an investment to BigLaw, a BigLaw firm will obviously not pay for an MBA - especially since an MBA will reduce your ability to bill massive amounts of hours (at least while you are taking it).

While no firm that I am aware of will pay you for an MBA, some an additional signing bonus and extra year of credit to JD/MBA. See , e.g. Goodwin Proctor.

Coincidentally enough, I was told by a partner just yesterday that it's common practice for firms in this area (Santa Clara/Silicon Valley) to pay you a bonus equivalent to the missing year's salary for getting the MBA.

MartianManhunter wrote:Coincidentally enough, I was told by a partner just yesterday that it's common practice for firms in this area (Santa Clara/Silicon Valley) to pay you a bonus equivalent to the missing year's salary for getting the MBA.

Historically common or in response to deferrals?

Firms aren't going to pay for anything they don't have to. OP, current legal market. Current legal market, OP. Glad to see you're meeting for the first time.

MrKappus wrote:Firms aren't going to pay for anything they don't have to. OP, current legal market. Current legal market, OP. Glad to see you're meeting for the first time.

Not true. Firms are still paying clerkship bonuses, bar stipends, $160k to first year associates when they would almost certainly get more applications than they need at $60k, and any number of other things.

That said, paying for an MBA - never heard of a firm that does it.

chadwick218 wrote:

MartianManhunter wrote:Coincidentally enough, I was told by a partner just yesterday that it's common practice for firms in this area (Santa Clara/Silicon Valley) to pay you a bonus equivalent to the missing year's salary for getting the MBA.

Historically common or in response to deferrals?

Historically common. I think it has to do with the nature of the work (emerging companies, venture capital) in this market. None of the firms I knew in DC did this.

Renzo wrote:

XxSpyKEx wrote:

quakeroats wrote:

alltheway wrote:Do law firms pay at all for an MBA, even a part-time one?

[TLS Users] tend to think little of the MBA, so I'd say you'll have a difficult time making your case [here].

Fixed.

Also true. But that is based on sound evidence. Several headhunters/hiring partners I've spoken with have echoed the concern that a JD/MBA = someone who won't practice law more than 2 years before taking a non-legal corporate/banking gig

This. There's concern that a JD/MBA applicant is not solely interested in practicing law in the long term. Too bad, because I think that an MBA could prepare a lawyer to better advise certain clients.

ToTransferOrNot wrote:

MrKappus wrote:Firms aren't going to pay for anything they don't have to. OP, current legal market. Current legal market, OP. Glad to see you're meeting for the first time.

Not true. Firms are still paying clerkship bonuses, bar stipends, $160k to first year associates when they would almost certainly get more applications than they need at $60k, and any number of other things.

That said, paying for an MBA - never heard of a firm that does it.

OK dood.

I have heard of one firm paying for an MBA. But, it was for someone who recently became a partner and likely was a candidate for firm management type positions.

Intuitively, it seems unlikely to me that a large firm would pay for a low-seniority associate to get an MBA when they could easily replace you with a fresh JD/MBA grad. Why spend the time and money to get you an MBA when they can just hire a new you that comes with one?