Merge Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 432538
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Merge
The firm I work for merged between my SA summer and my start date as an associate. It's been a moderately successful move for the two legacy firms, and although there are some cultural shifts I don't love, there were also some changes that really benefitted me. And most of what I really cared about (salary, getting to work with people I liked, a couple specific firm policies) stayed the same.
People in other positions in the firm (senior associates and some partners) have been negatively impacted and/or had personal goals delayed because of our merger, and that would really suck. But the newer you are, the less it matters I think, unless the whole thing implodes. Which depends a lot on whether the partners with the big books of business decide to stay or not. Something like 98-99% of our rainmakers from both sides have stayed, and the ones who left became judges or took in-house positions with clients, so that's a big part of why it's worked out I think.
If the firms aren't quite equal in size going in, my experience was that the bigger firm kind of ate the smaller firm in some ways, even though the size difference wasn't huge. So that's something to consider if you're at the smaller firm.
If it's a big leap in size for the firm (or adds a bunch of office locations), you're at least maybe more marketable as a lateral if you decide you're not a fan and bail.
People in other positions in the firm (senior associates and some partners) have been negatively impacted and/or had personal goals delayed because of our merger, and that would really suck. But the newer you are, the less it matters I think, unless the whole thing implodes. Which depends a lot on whether the partners with the big books of business decide to stay or not. Something like 98-99% of our rainmakers from both sides have stayed, and the ones who left became judges or took in-house positions with clients, so that's a big part of why it's worked out I think.
If the firms aren't quite equal in size going in, my experience was that the bigger firm kind of ate the smaller firm in some ways, even though the size difference wasn't huge. So that's something to consider if you're at the smaller firm.
If it's a big leap in size for the firm (or adds a bunch of office locations), you're at least maybe more marketable as a lateral if you decide you're not a fan and bail.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 432538
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Merge
I should add that I don't think either firm in my case "had" to merge. It was maybe a preemptive move, but both firms were doing pretty well on their own.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 432538
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Merge
above is my experience to a T. seen de santis lately, perchance?
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
