Top Law Schools

In my research, I found a few firms where partners came from substantially worse schools than the associates they hire. What does this mean? That the firm rose in the ranks over the years and thus was able to attract better candidates? Law school rankings weren't as important or as indicative of law school candidate strengths a generation ago?

Anonymous User wrote:In my research, I found a few firms where partners came from substantially worse schools than the associates they hire. What does this mean? That the firm rose in the ranks over the years and thus was able to attract better candidates? Law school rankings weren't as important or as indicative of law school candidate strengths a generation ago?

Yes, hiring was very different in past generations. When the legal market wasn't saturated, where you went wasn't as important. (Plus, those partners could have been in the top 10% and up of their classes, of course.) It's not so much that that the firm rose in the ranks, as that hiring has become a buyer's market. The firm could be absolutely the same, but they're getting applications from top candidates where they might not have previously because there aren't enough jobs to go around. (I've had employers tell me flat out they get much better candidates now than pre-ITE.)

Boomers had it easier .

1) survivor bias
2) job market

Laterals from government explain virtually every partner at my firm where you look at their profile and scratch your head and wonder how the fuck they got in the door.

Check the 2014 partner class of any 5 random V20 firms and you'll find non-T14 partners made

Also, great use of anon