Fit over prestige? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Thoughts on turning down a v10 for a v30-ish because the fit feels significantly better?

The v30 checks all the boxes for me. Smaller summer class, exit options seem in line with what I would want to eventually do, and it seems like the environment is positive with *some* semblance of work/life balance (acknowledging that this generally doesn't exist in big law but I have a child and so I'm thinking any of the v10s would be extremely challenging). I also think the work at the v30 is really in line with my interests.

my gut is telling me to go for the v30. is it dumb to overlook prestige? advice?

[objctnyrhnr]

I’m of the opinion that solidly market paying v25-v50 is really the sweet spot in biglaw. I don’t think that whatever is gained by something that feels a tad more prestigious in a v10 is worth whatever else might be sacrificed relative to QOL at the lower ranked firm.

[kaiser]

As someone who worked in multiple biglaw firms, with varying levels of "prestige", I would definitely say go with the V30. What you think is a difference in prestige isn't going to matter when you are looking to lateral or go in house. Either one is going to be a reputable and solid big firm experience, as far as subsequent employers are concerned. So go with the one that you can tell in your gut is likely to be a better fit.

[Anonymous User]

Just one man's opinion, but go with your gut. Intuition is a very powerful thing and for a reason. You'll always be able to say, "I had an offer from [V10] but turned it down," which will be impressive in and of itself. As long as V30 doesn't objectively hurt your chances at doing what you want to do later on - and it doesn't sound like it does - then go where you're going to feel most comfortable, not where some ranking company says is more prestigious. Also consider specific practice group rankings/recognition in the market and nationwide, not just overall Vault ranking.

(Devil's Advocate: You could probably do a year or two at V10 to see if you really don't like it, and then lateral to V30 or something similar. Depending on the specific firms you might not be able to do it the other way around.)

[Anonymous User]

Go with where you fit. Hands down.

[Anonymous User]

Remember -- most of the vault ranking is PPP. But you're getting paid lockstep regardless. Go where you think you'll be the most successful personally, not where the partners are going to profit off you the most.

[bwh8813]

I faced this same "dilemma" a number of years ago and went with my gut to the V30 and I've never doubted it once. I obviously don't know what my experience ultimately would have been at the V10, but the V30 turned out to be a perfect fit for all the reasons my gut was telling me it would. Good luck.

[Anonymous User]

Prestige would be kinda sweet tho!

[Anonymous User]

Just one man's opinion, but go with your gut. Intuition is a very powerful thing and for a reason. You'll always be able to say, "I had an offer from [V10] but turned it down," which will be impressive in and of itself. As long as V30 doesn't objectively hurt your chances at doing what you want to do later on - and it doesn't sound like it does - then go where you're going to feel most comfortable, not where some ranking company says is more prestigious. Also consider specific practice group rankings/recognition in the market and nationwide, not just overall Vault ranking.

(Devil's Advocate: You could probably do a year or two at V10 to see if you really don't like it, and then lateral to V30 or something similar. Depending on the specific firms you might not be able to do it the other way around.)

To play devil's advocate to your devil's advocate (because why not?), lateraling to another firm comes at a huge cost of losing your network and goodwill at your prior firm. For example, a 4th year associate at a v30 who recently lateraled from a v10 will usually be behind the pecking order compared to a 4th year associate in the same group who started at that v30 firm. In other words, if a matter needs to be staffed, the homegrown 4th year is typically going to be requested before a 4th year who recently lateraled to the firm, despite the fact that (oo la la) the 4th year has a v10 on their resume. It's even harder now in today's environment to develop a rapport/working relationship with your colleagues, when everyone is remote.

I was stuck with a similar choice years ago -- picking between several v10s where I didn't necessarily click with most of the people I interviewed with, versus a v30 that I felt more at home with. At my t14 law school, there was also tremendous pressure to pick the highest ranked firm you get an offer at, from classmates, professors and career services counselors. I picked the v30, which later led to an extremely awkward conversation with one of my favorite professors (a former v10 associate), who was dumbfounded at my choice and offered to connect me with connections at her old firm so that I could reconsider my decision.

Years later, dozens of my classmates (who chose a v10) are at their 3rd or 4th firm, while I'm still at the v30 and extremely happy, all things considered. I've received bonuses at or above the CSM scale every year, did not suffer from any "austerity" cuts, chose my practice group from day 1 (rather than being stuck in a pedantic rotation system), and have enough of a semblance of a work/life balance that I don't plan on leaving imminently (...which is the best you can hope for as a midlevel or senor associate in biglaw).

[Anonymous User]

fit.

sincerely, v5 assoc.

[Sackboy]

fit.

sincerely, v5 assoc.

[Anonymous User]

fit.

sincerely, v5 assoc.

Aren't you inherently unqualified to recommend that, though? After all, you are still working at a V5. So either the firm is a good fit, in which case you did not actually have to decide between prestige and fit, or the firm is not a good fit, in which case your suggestion that fit is more important is undermined by the fact that you are standing by your decision to weigh prestige more. This is a genuine request for elaboration, not assholery, I promise.

[Anonymous User]

Just one man's opinion, but go with your gut. Intuition is a very powerful thing and for a reason. You'll always be able to say, "I had an offer from [V10] but turned it down," which will be impressive in and of itself. As long as V30 doesn't objectively hurt your chances at doing what you want to do later on - and it doesn't sound like it does - then go where you're going to feel most comfortable, not where some ranking company says is more prestigious. Also consider specific practice group rankings/recognition in the market and nationwide, not just overall Vault ranking.

(Devil's Advocate: You could probably do a year or two at V10 to see if you really don't like it, and then lateral to V30 or something similar. Depending on the specific firms you might not be able to do it the other way around.)

To play devil's advocate to your devil's advocate (because why not?), lateraling to another firm comes at a huge cost of losing your network and goodwill at your prior firm. For example, a 4th year associate at a v30 who recently lateraled from a v10 will usually be behind the pecking order compared to a 4th year associate in the same group who started at that v30 firm. In other words, if a matter needs to be staffed, the homegrown 4th year is typically going to be requested before a 4th year who recently lateraled to the firm, despite the fact that (oo la la) the 4th year has a v10 on their resume. It's even harder now in today's environment to develop a rapport/working relationship with your colleagues, when everyone is remote.

I was stuck with a similar choice years ago -- picking between several v10s where I didn't necessarily click with most of the people I interviewed with, versus a v30 that I felt more at home with. At my t14 law school, there was also tremendous pressure to pick the highest ranked firm you get an offer at, from classmates, professors and career services counselors. I picked the v30, which later led to an extremely awkward conversation with one of my favorite professors (a former v10 associate), who was dumbfounded at my choice and offered to connect me with connections at her old firm so that I could reconsider my decision.

Years later, dozens of my classmates (who chose a v10) are at their 3rd or 4th firm, while I'm still at the v30 and extremely happy, all things considered. I've received bonuses at or above the CSM scale every year, did not suffer from any "austerity" cuts, chose my practice group from day 1 (rather than being stuck in a pedantic rotation system), and have enough of a semblance of a work/life balance that I don't plan on leaving imminently (...which is the best you can hope for as a midlevel or senor associate in biglaw).

Original devil's advocate here. Touché, salesman. (Just reinforces my real advice, which was go with your gut.)

[Anonymous User]

I started at a V15 that I chose for the "prestige", then lateraled to a V50 firm after 2 years where I was so much happier and which was much better fit. Knowing what I know now, I realize I should have focused on fit all along, and chosen my initial firm more like how I chose my lateral firm. In fact, my V50 firm was filled with lateral hires who were looking to course-correct after having made the mistake of choosing their initial firm solely based on "prestige".

[The Lsat Airbender]

fit.

sincerely, v5 assoc.

Aren't you inherently unqualified to recommend that, though? After all, you are still working at a V5. So either the firm is a good fit, in which case you did not actually have to decide between prestige and fit, or the firm is not a good fit, in which case your suggestion that fit is more important is undermined by the fact that you are standing by your decision to weigh prestige more. This is a genuine request for elaboration, not assholery, I promise.

Any given person can only really see one side of the fence or another, and it's not so easy to cross back and forth. I think the input of jaded v10 associates is perfectly useful here.

[Anonymous User]

Any given person can only really see one side of the fence or another, and it's not so easy to cross back and forth. I think the input of jaded v10 associates is perfectly useful here.

Person you are responding to--agreed, but part of the data set is the fact that a jaded v10 associate has chosen not to transfer despite valuing "fit" over "prestige." Surely that is also relevant?

[The Lsat Airbender]

Any given person can only really see one side of the fence or another, and it's not so easy to cross back and forth. I think the input of jaded v10 associates is perfectly useful here.

Person you are responding to--agreed, but part of the data set is the fact that a jaded v10 associate has chosen not to transfer despite valuing "fit" over "prestige." Surely that is also relevant?

I don't see how can infer the bolded. Maybe they're stuck at their v5 because their practice area isn't hiring laterals during COVID. Maybe they're a 2nd-year and think lateralling so early could be a risky career move, even though they'd be happier elsewhere, so they've decided to tough it out another year or two before going in-house. Maybe it's just sheer inertia, which happens to a lot of people when they're overworked.

[nixy]

Prestige would be kinda sweet tho!

I mean it’s not like V30 firms have no prestige, they just don’t have quite as much.

[Anonymous User]

If this was like V10 vs V100, then yeah, I might put more emphasis on prestige.

But V10 vs V30 is not as different as people might believe so in that case, I would put more emphasis on fit.

Long story short: if you want to impress anonymous users on TLS, then go for prestige. If you want to have a good start to a (hopefully) fulfilling legal career, go for fit.

[Lacepiece23]

Just one counter point. I chose my firm based on fit and worklife balance. I went to a secondary market. And my first two years were rough.

I billed like 2100 hours, which I know isn’t crazy. But it was all real lawyer work. No Netflix while doing doc review for me.

My friends, however, billed like a 100 more hours while doing doc review and never having to worry about getting hours cut.

And they got paid a ton more.

[existentialcrisis]

If the v30 is comparably strong in the practice area that interest you and you have a realistic chance of getting that group, then by all means go for it. However, I would be extremely skeptical about how much you can learn about "fit" at firms that have thousands of lawyers based on interviewing with a few people for 30 minutes each.

[Nom_Sawyer]

Just one counter point. I chose my firm based on fit and worklife balance. I went to a secondary market. And my first two years were rough.

I billed like 2100 hours, which I know isn’t crazy. But it was all real lawyer work. No Netflix while doing doc review for me.

My friends, however, billed like a 100 more hours while doing doc review and never having to worry about getting hours cut.

And they got paid a ton more.

Your first point is valid, but the second point doesn't really apply since, as long you're discussing V50 in a large market, your compensation if not going to vary much, if at all (barring of course some of the outliers highlighted during the Covid pandemic that people should now avoid).

[ingoodkompany]

If the v30 is comparably strong in the practice area that interest you and you have a realistic chance of getting that group, then by all means go for it. However, I would be extremely skeptical about how much you can learn about "fit" at firms that have thousands of lawyers based on interviewing with a few people for 30 minutes each.

This is pretty much exactly my thinking. If I’m billing similar hours at most of these firms, I’m going with the strongest reputation + strongest in my practice area of interest. Anecdata by way of “culture” TLS questions and a few interviewers I’ve met just really does not seem enough to tip the scales for me personally.

[username7283012341]

If the v30 is comparably strong in the practice area that interest you and you have a realistic chance of getting that group, then by all means go for it. However, I would be extremely skeptical about how much you can learn about "fit" at firms that have thousands of lawyers based on interviewing with a few people for 30 minutes each.

This is pretty much exactly my thinking. If I’m billing similar hours at most of these firms, I’m going with the strongest reputation + strongest in my practice area of interest. Anecdata by way of “culture” TLS questions and a few interviewers I’ve met just really does not seem enough to tip the scales for me personally.

I've only been at a v30+, but I think there are cultural differences, and it has to do with who self-selects in to the firm. Most of my colleagues had plenty of offers from v10s or v5s and chose my v30+ instead, for the culture or certain practice groups or some combination of reasons. Others lateraled from v10s as course-correction, as mentioned earlier in the thread. I think that results in a culture that's friendlier and not at all cutthroat because people are NOT here for the prestige, but for some other concrete reason.

All we can offer are wild over-generalizations, of course, and that's what I've done here. But I can say, a lot of the horror stories I read on TLS about screamers and the like are completely foreign to me, and a lot of the behavior that seems par for the course at some places would be unacceptable at my lowly v30+ (I keep saying that because I don't know off the top of my head what our Vault ranking is, and it could not make less of a difference in my life).

[avenuem]

The most prestigious allows you to go nearly anywhere you fit.

Nearly everywhere you fit isn't going to allow you to go prestigious.

You might fit at Charlotte Law School, but would you choose it over Harvard all else being equal?
You might fit at Altavista or Yahoo Search, but would you choose it over Google?
You might fit at McDonalds, but would you choose it over Applebees?