Junior boutique associate - should I be chasing assignments? Forum

[kiwifanta]

I am a junior associate at a boutique that operates a bit like a big firm (separate internal practice groups, etc.).

Although fairly new to practice, and especially to my current firm, I'm starting to recognize when I really want to be staffed on a matter or when I really want to work with a particular partner or senior associate (and when I absolutely don't, on both counts).

How many of you out there specifically chase assignments and partners? How many would recommend it?

Because of the size of my firm, I feel that I have to be a bit careful with the politics of it all (it might be noticeable if I'm actively asking to work with some and not others), and I also don't want to be an irritation to others because I'm constantly asking to be put on a project. Part of what I am wondering is, is it generally a positive or an annoyance to ask an attorney to work on a certain case and then follow up a number of times about it (I foresee some partners saying "sure" and then forgetting about it)?

(Part of me thinks, this is my career, and my future, and though I'm so grateful for the chance to be with my firm, I can't go through the next few years passively letting others dictate what professional direction I'm taking... And I don't know if I'm right or wrong in thinking this way.)

[TooOld4This]

Yes, you should be seeking out the work you want, but not by openly subverting the system. Let the people you want to work with, know that you have an interest in their work. Offer to take on small projects or non-billable work. You get to do the work you want to do with the people you want by generating demand. If you do good work and are good to work with, you shouldn't have to chase work, it will come to you (though you may need to reach out when your plate is getting light to let them know you are available).

[kiwifanta]

What does it mean to be "good to work with"? I know it seems like a dumb question, but I would love the older attorney perspective on this.

I am generally very pleasant, but lately have had a couple of screwups, one where I forgot to attach copies of cases to a memo in which they were cited (really got the receiving attorney upset) and another where I got defensive when a partner tried to throw me under the bus when she gave the client wrong information (that she 100% did not get from me, and I replied in a polite but kind of pushy way that made that clear - big oops and I wish I'd just taken the blame like a good junior).

Will these sorts of things cause those individual people to not want to work with me anymore? I'm trying to get back on track with both attorneys, but we'll see how that goes.

[TooOld4This]

What does it mean to be "good to work with"? I know it seems like a dumb question, but I would love the older attorney perspective on this.

I am generally very pleasant, but lately have had a couple of screwups, one where I forgot to attach copies of cases to a memo in which they were cited (really got the receiving attorney upset) and another where I got defensive when a partner tried to throw me under the bus when she gave the client wrong information (that she 100% did not get from me, and I replied in a polite but kind of pushy way that made that clear - big oops and I wish I'd just taken the blame like a good junior).

Will these sorts of things cause those individual people to not want to work with me anymore? I'm trying to get back on track with both attorneys, but we'll see how that goes.

Good to work with, for me, means that I don't create more work for myself when I give you an assignment. Actually, that is the minimum standard. If it will take me longer to chase after you or to fix what you did than if I did it myself, or if I feel like I can't trust your work to be accurate, I will avoid working with you.

I try to work with people who can anticipate issues. Not attaching cases to a memo is a good example. If I asked you to attach and you didn't, I'd be pissed. How much I'd hold it against you would depend on whether I saw this as a one-off mistake (in which case I'd fume and get over it) or if this was part of a pattern of substandard work. If I didn't ask you to, but you either attached or sent me a link to a folder where they could all be found, I'd be very happy and would seek you out for future projects.

I am not a throw someone under the bus type. I don't know the specifics of your scenario, but I could imagine that it may have been a case of miscommunication (the partner misunderstood something you have them, or you miscommunicated something), you took a generalized whitewashing of a screw up as being directed at you when it wasn't intended to be targeted, or the partner was a jerk and intentionally throwing you under the bus. If you were 100% sure that it was the last category, an offline discussion is a legit way of dealing with it, but it does need to be offline, and you better be 100% sure of the facts. Let those chips fall where they may. However, there are more tactful ways of dealing with the situation. You could address it as you wanting to learn from the experience (I thought I had communicated X - and reference the relevant conversation/email/memo - but it seems you understood Y, what can I do differently) this flags the issue, but gives a graceful way out for the partner.

Mistakes are going to be made. How responsive you are to them is what is critical.

[kiwifanta]

Good to work with, for me, means that I don't create more work for myself when I give you an assignment. Actually, that is the minimum standard. If it will take me longer to chase after you or to fix what you did than if I did it myself, or if I feel like I can't trust your work to be accurate, I will avoid working with you.

I try to work with people who can anticipate issues. Not attaching cases to a memo is a good example. If I asked you to attach and you didn't, I'd be pissed. How much I'd hold it against you would depend on whether I saw this as a one-off mistake (in which case I'd fume and get over it) or if this was part of a pattern of substandard work. If I didn't ask you to, but you either attached or sent me a link to a folder where they could all be found, I'd be very happy and would seek you out for future projects.

I am not a throw someone under the bus type. I don't know the specifics of your scenario, but I could imagine that it may have been a case of miscommunication (the partner misunderstood something you have them, or you miscommunicated something), you took a generalized whitewashing of a screw up as being directed at you when it wasn't intended to be targeted, or the partner was a jerk and intentionally throwing you under the bus. If you were 100% sure that it was the last category, an offline discussion is a legit way of dealing with it, but it does need to be offline, and you better be 100% sure of the facts. Let those chips fall where they may. However, there are more tactful ways of dealing with the situation. You could address it as you wanting to learn from the experience (I thought I had communicated X - and reference the relevant conversation/email/memo - but it seems you understood Y, what can I do differently) this flags the issue, but gives a graceful way out for the partner.

Mistakes are going to be made. How responsive you are to them is what is critical.

This is phenomenal advice. It's the kind of thinking that I had my first few months in, and that slowly faded over time (hence my defensiveness as of late).

Some days I feel pretty beat up and don't react well when I've made a mistake, and especially when someone else has believed that I've made a mistake and I haven't. It can be hard to always stay on your game in a fast-paced environment. It can also be tough to swallow your pride and say, "It seems like I've messed up somewhere; can you tell me where and how I can avoid this in the future?" It's sometimes easier to just ignore it and move on. But it doesn't help foster relationships of trust.

If an associate has slipped up recently, e.g., not attaching cases or getting defensive or not following up on mistakes like one should be, in your eyes, can that associate bring themselves back to a place where you would want to work with them again?