A warning about indoctrination Forum

[Anonymous User]

The past few weeks, I've seen 2Ls get suckered into a few firms' bullshit, PR and cult-like indoctrination. In my experience, only the worst organizations promote themselves with intangible and subjective qualities. They do this because they can't compete on *real* things, so they make stuff up to con people. If this is happening with one of your firms, please treat it as a red flag and think critically.

[QContinuum]

a few firms' bullshit, PR and cult-like indoctrination. In my experience, only the worst organizations promote themselves with intangible and subjective qualities.

Uh, can we be a bit more specific (and a bit less hyperbolic) here? Things like culture are intangible and subjective, but critically important nonetheless.

[Anonymous User]

a few firms' bullshit, PR and cult-like indoctrination. In my experience, only the worst organizations promote themselves with intangible and subjective qualities.

Uh, can we be a bit more specific (and a bit less hyperbolic) here? Things like culture are intangible and subjective, but critically important nonetheless.

OK. Let's do the critical thinking exercise here. Can you please prepare a two-column chart with two firms you're choosing between, one of which has a good "culture" and one of which has a bad one and -- as specifically as possible -- list the real/tangible/measurable (if possible) things the former has that the latter does not? For example, a common line of con artist organizations is that they have better and more likable people than that other organization. To do this exercise with such a firm, you would describe the specific qualities that make this firm's attorneys better or more likable.

[nixy]

“Attorneys being more likable” isn’t really PR/indoctrination though - all institutions are going to out their more sociable people in positions where they deal with other people. And people here regularly tell 2Ls not to rely on “clicking” with people they meet at interviews because half to all of those people will be gone by the time they start working there anyway.

Like I get some of what you’re saying and 2Ls definitely need to be more critical about what firms tell them and have to offer, but specific evidence of firms pushing these qualities in the absence of more concrete benefits would look less conspiracy-theory-ish.

[QContinuum]

By culture I mean things like how some firms are more competitive, some are more, dare I say, socialist, some are more fratty, some are more formal, and some are Quinn. I don't think that's PR/indoctrination, there really are differences between the culture at, say, DPW versus Skadden, or K&E versus Deb.

[Anonymous User]

and some are Quinn.

I laughed out loud.

[Anonymous User]

By culture I mean things like how some firms are more competitive, some are more, dare I say, socialist, some are more fratty, some are more formal, and some are Quinn. I don't think that's PR/indoctrination, there really are differences between the culture at, say, DPW versus Skadden, or K&E versus Deb.

OK this is good. Continuing the exercise . . . the only tangible thing I was able to pull from that list is dress code which, you're absolutely right, is a real thing. It's not bullshit. But try to flesh out fratty, socialist, formal into as many real and specific things as you can. Any way, I don't mean to get into an argument as that was not the intent of this thread at all. I was just trying to give 2Ls a tool they could use to prevent being suckered into a worse firm. I'm doing to drop this, as I think you get what I mean.

[Anonymous User]

Honestly, if you don’t have significant work experience it will be hard for you to understand the true firm culture. When you work long enough you find that eveyone says the same things about where they work ex teamwork collaboration collegiatly ect... It’s BS at some place and legit at others. You just have to learn how to read a place and that comes with time.

If you’re KJD, you’re younger. So you’ll just have to learn the heard way through trial and error. It’s ok though cuz you’ll have time in your life to make switches. This happened to my friend who was KJD, went v10 big law and found out that the firm culture wasn’t for her. She switched to a mid level firm and now she’s happier.

It’ll be fine y’all. Trust your instincts. If you have a friend who’s KJD, maybe question their perspective internally. But it’s not fair to put down a KJD who’s doing the best they can with what they know.

[Anonymous User]

I don’t understand why you are so concerned. If people who are seeking a social/drafty culture end up at Skadden, they will help create that culture. If people who want to change the world end up at Selendy, they will end up doing that at Selendy. Firms aren’t cults.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Before I go let me give an example of a firm that *doesn't* use bullshit terms like "we're social/drafty" which the person above used. If anyone tells you their firm is "social/drafty" (when in reality biglaw is a highly competitive up-and-out workplace) then run, unless of course if you have no better options.

I've pulled out the "philosophy" of a top-tier firm. Notice how everything they promote about themselves is real.
• we hire only the top students from the nation’s finest law schools, [This is real, they want high class rank and a top school]
• we train our associates through a rigorous rotation of practices, [This is a real thing. You will rotate through departments. The training part I'll leave in the "possible bullshit" category for now, although it's probably a fair statement as you will get on the job training.]
• we elevate partners exclusively from within [THIS IS HUGE. Shitty firms hire lateral partners, good firms promote from within. This can be measured and it's a shame none of the garbage firm rankings do this.]
• and we compensate partners in a lockstep system throughout their careers. [Again, HUGE. Lockstep is a real thing and it affects how people interact with each other]

I was going to pull the same sort of "culture" section from a lower-ranked firm and highlight the bullshit, but on second thought I don't want to get all negative. Any way, I really don't mean to get into an argument so I'm off. Just trying to help 2Ls.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Before I go let me give an example of a firm that *doesn't* use bullshit terms like "we're social/drafty" which the person above used. If anyone tells you their firm is "social/drafty" (when in reality biglaw is a highly competitive up-and-out workplace) then run, unless of course if you have no better options.

I've pulled out the "philosophy" of a top-tier firm. Notice how everything they promote about themselves is real.
• we hire only the top students from the nation’s finest law schools, [This is real, they want high class rank and a top school]
• we train our associates through a rigorous rotation of practices, [This is a real thing. You will rotate through departments. The training part I'll leave in the "possible bullshit" category for now, although it's probably a fair statement as you will get on the job training.]
• we elevate partners exclusively from within [THIS IS HUGE. Shitty firms hire lateral partners, good firms promote from within. This can be measured and it's a shame no one measures it.]
• and we compensate partners in a lockstep system throughout their careers. [Again, HUGE. Lockstep is a real thing and it affects how people interact with each other]

I was going to pull the same sort of section from a lower-ranked firm and highlight the bullshit, but on second thought I don't want to get all negative.

Sorry I meant social/fratty. Damn autocorrect. “Lower ranked” firms also describe their system in those terms. (Note that you’re the one imposing your subjective belief that rotation/lockstep/internal hiring are better but that’s not the point here)

If a firm is tiny and they promise early substantive experience, that’s not a false promise. If a firm like dpw promises collegial atmosphere, that’s not a false promise. I would actually love to hear the counter examples that you declined to share.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Before I go let me give an example of a firm that *doesn't* use bullshit terms like "we're social/drafty" which the person above used. If anyone tells you their firm is "social/drafty" (when in reality biglaw is a highly competitive up-and-out workplace) then run, unless of course if you have no better options.

I've pulled out the "philosophy" of a top-tier firm. Notice how everything they promote about themselves is real.
• we hire only the top students from the nation’s finest law schools, [This is real, they want high class rank and a top school]
• we train our associates through a rigorous rotation of practices, [This is a real thing. You will rotate through departments. The training part I'll leave in the "possible bullshit" category for now, although it's probably a fair statement as you will get on the job training.]
• we elevate partners exclusively from within [THIS IS HUGE. Shitty firms hire lateral partners, good firms promote from within. This can be measured and it's a shame none of the garbage firm rankings do this.]
• and we compensate partners in a lockstep system throughout their careers. [Again, HUGE. Lockstep is a real thing and it affects how people interact with each other]

I was going to pull the same sort of "culture" section from a lower-ranked firm and highlight the bullshit, but on second thought I don't want to get all negative. Any way, I really don't mean to get into an argument so I'm off. Just trying to help 2Ls.

Jeez... just say you got a Cravath offer...

[Anonymous User]

(Note that you’re the one imposing your subjective belief that rotation/lockstep/internal hiring are better but that’s not the point here)

Step 1 -- list the real/observable/verifiable/measurable (as much as possible) qualities of each firm.
Step 2 -- Now that you have them on a piece of paper, make your subjective choice between the two.
For example,
Step 1 -- Firm 1 is "eat what you kill" / "associates are given work via the free market system" / "we get 75% of our partners from laterals not internally" and Firm 2 is lockstep/rotation/internal promotions. (objective)
Step 2 -- Which do I want? (subjective)

If a firm is tiny and they promise early substantive experience, that’s not a false promise.

The specific quality you would put down on the chart is "tiny firm" because that's real and verifiable. If there's some evidence of substantive experience, add that to the chart. But do not add "will get substantive experience" to the chart as that could be bullshit.

If a firm like dpw promises collegial atmosphere, that’s not a false promise.

Collegial atmosphere is definitely bullshit. Again, law firms are hyper-competitive up-and-out organizations. The people I know at DPW say it's a passive aggressive hell hole. I wouldn't add collegial to the list at all, but if I did I'd add it as "have to act friendly all the time. Possibly insincere and passive aggressive coworkers."

Good luck 2Ls.

[Skool]

• we elevate partners exclusively from within [THIS IS HUGE. Shitty firms hire lateral partners, good firms promote from within. This can be measured and it's a shame none of the garbage firm rankings do this.]
• and we compensate partners in a lockstep system throughout their careers. [Again, HUGE. Lockstep is a real thing and it affects how people interact with each other]

TLS is basically a place where all institutional knowledge about the Profession is gone. Such a weird thing to say.

[Anonymous User]

• we elevate partners exclusively from within [THIS IS HUGE. Shitty firms hire lateral partners, good firms promote from within. This can be measured and it's a shame none of the garbage firm rankings do this.]
• and we compensate partners in a lockstep system throughout their careers. [Again, HUGE. Lockstep is a real thing and it affects how people interact with each other]

TLS is basically a place where all institutional knowledge about the Profession is gone. Such a weird thing to say.

When a firm pushes one of its own associates out after 7 years, and hires someone from another firm as a lateral partner it's a damning admission that their training and development is poor. "You've been learning from us for 7 years? No thank you we want someone good as partner." Law websites should measure this and rank firms accordingly but let's be honest, that requires work and they're lazy.

[nixy]

I mean there are other circumstances in which you hire laterals. It’s not always literally to replace someone you pushed out the door.

[Anonymous User]

Indoctrination starts before you even arrive in law school. Get over it.

And stop assuming people are sheep. You don't know them or their goals.

Everyone is different.

[hoos89]

• we elevate partners exclusively from within [THIS IS HUGE. Shitty firms hire lateral partners, good firms promote from within. This can be measured and it's a shame none of the garbage firm rankings do this.]
• and we compensate partners in a lockstep system throughout their careers. [Again, HUGE. Lockstep is a real thing and it affects how people interact with each other]

TLS is basically a place where all institutional knowledge about the Profession is gone. Such a weird thing to say.

When a firm pushes one of its own associates out after 7 years, and hires someone from another firm as a lateral partner it's a damning admission that their training and development is poor. "You've been learning from us for 7 years? No thank you we want someone good as partner." Law websites should measure this and rank firms accordingly but let's be honest, that requires work and they're lazy.

Or it's an admission that lateral partners typically have established books of business and senior associates don't. Also it's not like Cravath doesn't push associates out...is that an admission that their training isn't up to snuff?

[Anonymous User]

• we elevate partners exclusively from within [THIS IS HUGE. Shitty firms hire lateral partners, good firms promote from within. This can be measured and it's a shame none of the garbage firm rankings do this.]
• and we compensate partners in a lockstep system throughout their careers. [Again, HUGE. Lockstep is a real thing and it affects how people interact with each other]

TLS is basically a place where all institutional knowledge about the Profession is gone. Such a weird thing to say.

When a firm pushes one of its own associates out after 7 years, and hires someone from another firm as a lateral partner it's a damning admission that their training and development is poor. "You've been learning from us for 7 years? No thank you we want someone good as partner." Law websites should measure this and rank firms accordingly but let's be honest, that requires work and they're lazy.

Firms don’t hire lateral junior service partners. I’ve never heard of that happening. The laterals they hire are 15-20 year experienced partners with a good book of business. Anyone under 10 is gonna be an of counsel at best or more likely a forever associate who maybe gets promoted to of counsel. You are doing an apples and oranges comparison of two very different people.

[barkschool]

“Attorneys being more likable” isn’t really PR/indoctrination though - all institutions are going to out their more sociable people in positions where they deal with other people. And people here regularly tell 2Ls not to rely on “clicking” with people they meet at interviews because half to all of those people will be gone by the time they start working there anyway.

Like I get some of what you’re saying and 2Ls definitely need to be more critical about what firms tell them and have to offer, but specific evidence of firms pushing these qualities in the absence of more concrete benefits would look less conspiracy-theory-ish.

Just for future readers. I actually thought this was a joke like 5 years ago when i read it. But sure enough, half of my call back interviewers didn’t work there when I started.

[Anonymous User]

Firms don’t hire lateral junior service partners. I’ve never heard of that happening. The laterals they hire are 15-20 year experienced partners with a good book of business. Anyone under 10 is gonna be an of counsel at best or more likely a forever associate who maybe gets promoted to of counsel. You are doing an apples and oranges comparison of two very different people.

I know many examples of laterals with virtually no book hired into junior or service partner positions. These are the majority of lateral partner hires. If someone had the time they could prepare a report using data from http://www.lateral.ly

[Anonymous User]

Firms don’t hire lateral junior service partners. I’ve never heard of that happening. The laterals they hire are 15-20 year experienced partners with a good book of business. Anyone under 10 is gonna be an of counsel at best or more likely a forever associate who maybe gets promoted to of counsel. You are doing an apples and oranges comparison of two very different people.

I know many examples of laterals with virtually no book hired into junior or service partner positions. These are the majority of lateral partner hires. If someone had the time they could prepare a report using data from http://www.lateral.ly

I would say Partner laterals tend to fall in two different buckets... at least on a broad level. A rising star with big clients at a better firm that’s being Blocked by gray hairs from advancing politically and being told he has a shot to be an influential power player at new firm or a rockstar at lesser firm who feels he needs to upgrade to get that next level of client. A pure probably not even 40 year old partner who just works under a rainmaker and most marketable trait is his ability to bill 100 hours a week is one of the least in demand people in biglaw and if he moves is probably being named of counsel with a promise to have a shot to be partner in a year or two.

[Anonymous User]

I would say Partner laterals tend to fall in two different buckets... at least on a broad level. A rising star with big clients at a better firm that’s being Blocked by gray hairs from advancing politically and being told he has a shot to be an influential power player at new firm or a rockstar at lesser firm who feels he needs to upgrade to get that next level of client. A pure probably not even 40 year old partner who just works under a rainmaker and most marketable trait is his ability to bill 100 hours a week is one of the least in demand people in biglaw and if he moves is probably being named of counsel with a promise to have a shot to be partner in a year or two.

Why would "gray hairs" block someone who will make them money? I can't think of an example of your first type. Maybe that woman who went from Cravath to K&E for $11 million? The second example happens but they often come in as partner instead of of counsel (which can be a resume killer). There are many other categories. Someone from government with no book can come in as a junior partner. Someone who was an average associate at their prior firm can finagle that into a partner position at a lower-ranked firm. . . . If you're really curious you can study such transfers on lateral.ly.

[Anonymous User]

I would say Partner laterals tend to fall in two different buckets... at least on a broad level. A rising star with big clients at a better firm that’s being Blocked by gray hairs from advancing politically and being told he has a shot to be an influential power player at new firm or a rockstar at lesser firm who feels he needs to upgrade to get that next level of client. A pure probably not even 40 year old partner who just works under a rainmaker and most marketable trait is his ability to bill 100 hours a week is one of the least in demand people in biglaw and if he moves is probably being named of counsel with a promise to have a shot to be partner in a year or two.

Why would "gray hairs" block someone who will make them money? I can't think of an example of your first type. Maybe that woman who went from Cravath to K&E for $11 million? The second example happens but they often come in as partner instead of of counsel (which can be a resume killer). There are many other categories. Someone from government with no book can come in as a junior partner. Someone who was an average associate at their prior firm can finagle that into a partner position at a lower-ranked firm. . . . If you're really curious you can study such transfers on lateral.ly.

If the firm only does lockstep when they bring in a lot of business... if they want to hold power within the decision making of the group (chair vice chair of whatever).. stuff like that happens all the time if the “power base” isn’t catering to their wants. Partnerships can be very political.

[Anonymous User]

I would say Partner laterals tend to fall in two different buckets... at least on a broad level. A rising star with big clients at a better firm that’s being Blocked by gray hairs from advancing politically and being told he has a shot to be an influential power player at new firm or a rockstar at lesser firm who feels he needs to upgrade to get that next level of client. A pure probably not even 40 year old partner who just works under a rainmaker and most marketable trait is his ability to bill 100 hours a week is one of the least in demand people in biglaw and if he moves is probably being named of counsel with a promise to have a shot to be partner in a year or two.

Why would "gray hairs" block someone who will make them money? I can't think of an example of your first type. Maybe that woman who went from Cravath to K&E for $11 million? The second example happens but they often come in as partner instead of of counsel (which can be a resume killer). There are many other categories. Someone from government with no book can come in as a junior partner. Someone who was an average associate at their prior firm can finagle that into a partner position at a lower-ranked firm. . . . If you're really curious you can study such transfers on lateral.ly.

Not the prior anon but I have seen this happen for conflicts reasons, because that partner is in a practice group that the power center in the firm doesn’t want to focus on or if that partner’s practice would benefit from expansion in a non-home office and they don’t want to make the investment.