Fulfillment: Senior MBB Consultant vs Senior Big Law Transactional Lawyer
Posted: Sun Feb 12, 2017 7:05 pm
Though I wouldn't think there would be many who experienced both sides personally, I'm curious to know how the two positions compare from the standpoint of sense of reward /challenges derived from each of its work. I'm a midlevel associate at biglaw doing finance. So far from my short research and experience it seems like:
Senior Lawyer
+: you are solving a legal problem for the client; work is often repetitive therefore you get to pay more attention to details and nuances; you assess risk of a certain transaction, which is always an important data point for the biz side in making decision; prestige recognized by general public;
-: problem solving aspect is limited to execution of deal / documentation; what needs to be documented is largely already decided by biz ppl (lawyers only control how to document; sometime may control "what" but usually dictated by the term sheet); the risk analysis is usually one of many other important data points that goes into the calculus of deciding on a transaction; vulnerability of being replaced by AI (it's just demeaning); too much emphasis on precedent, therefore less room for creativity
Senior Consultant
+: you work on big picture matters and creativity is more often virtue than vice; no billable hours requirement which incentives efficiency; work cannot be easily automated; many time each case deals with totally different issues and/or field which forces you to be on steep learning curve all the time
-: what you produce many times don't get used by the client; often you are removed from the matter before you find out the outcome;
Of course this is a very subjective criteria, but thought there is a good chance to draw out a consensus given that most people on TLS seem to find similar tasks mundane (though I haven't really come across about work people find exciting). Let me know what your thoughts are, especially the consultant/ex-constulants
Senior Lawyer
+: you are solving a legal problem for the client; work is often repetitive therefore you get to pay more attention to details and nuances; you assess risk of a certain transaction, which is always an important data point for the biz side in making decision; prestige recognized by general public;
-: problem solving aspect is limited to execution of deal / documentation; what needs to be documented is largely already decided by biz ppl (lawyers only control how to document; sometime may control "what" but usually dictated by the term sheet); the risk analysis is usually one of many other important data points that goes into the calculus of deciding on a transaction; vulnerability of being replaced by AI (it's just demeaning); too much emphasis on precedent, therefore less room for creativity
Senior Consultant
+: you work on big picture matters and creativity is more often virtue than vice; no billable hours requirement which incentives efficiency; work cannot be easily automated; many time each case deals with totally different issues and/or field which forces you to be on steep learning curve all the time
-: what you produce many times don't get used by the client; often you are removed from the matter before you find out the outcome;
Of course this is a very subjective criteria, but thought there is a good chance to draw out a consensus given that most people on TLS seem to find similar tasks mundane (though I haven't really come across about work people find exciting). Let me know what your thoughts are, especially the consultant/ex-constulants