Practice Group (Help!!) Forum

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
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 User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Practice Group (Help!!)

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Jun 11, 2021 1:01 pm

Hi Everyone,

At a firm where we have to list our interests in practice groups at the end of the summer and we get sorted into practices based off of our answers, as well as how the attorneys rank us as summers. However, a few weeks in, it's clear that if you want a group you need to heavily target them (ie. coffee chats, lunches, doing mostly assignments with this group, etc.). The choices are between a "specialist" group (think Bankruptcy, Real Estate, Labor) or the general Corporate group.

Here's what I want ideally: I stay at this firm for my career and make partner. Probably wont happen, but I don't want to make a decision that closes this door.

I don't know what the future holds. Maybe I will want to lateral in 3 years. I don't want to make a decision that closes this door. Maybe I will want to go in-house in 5 years. I don't want to make a decision that closes that door either.

The issue is I'm dumb and clueless and I don't really know how firms work. Can I lateral with no issues even though my practice is specialized? Are in-house opportunities similar between practice groups (at a V10 if this makes a difference)? Is partnership pretty much just completely luck? Is there a really large difference in chances at partnership between going to a specialist group and the general corporate group? I've also been told that lateral and in-house opportunities are much better as a corporate associate. I'm just really conflicted. The specialist group has shown much more interest in me, and corporate is kind of cold. I know everyone likes to feel like they're wanted, but I don't want to make career decisions based solely off of this.

I'm trying to understand the future career implications of my decision now, please help!

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Practice Group (Help!!)

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Jun 11, 2021 1:39 pm

I think it may depend on how your firm structures your practice groups. Based upon your post, it sounds like if you choose a "specialist" group then you won't actually be considered part of the broader corporate umbrella (i.e., you will not routinely receive some percentage of your work as general corporate work and you will not be able to pivot to accepting more general corporate work unless you formally switch your practice group or somehow work outside of your practice group, which may require an awkward discussion with your practice group's leadership).

If that's the case, then I think it's unfortunately an actually pretty important question as to whether you are ready to commit to a specialist group.

I think the "employable/lateral" question has a few parts. Depending on the specialist group, you may have better, worse or exactly the same "employability" as a general corporate associate (when looking at employability generally, like in terms of job offers at certain pay scales and being able to count on being able to find a job to either lateral or ultimately move post-biglaw). I see it as basically two things to keep in mind. The first is that if you choose to be in a specialist group, then you will likely remain within that specialist group (unless you pivot, which is not impossible) for your biglaw career and thus accept a post-biglaw job that corresponds to that specialist group. In other words, if you enter a real estate/labor/bankruptcy group, then both the biglaw and in-house options that are open to you will be substantively different (i.e. focused on that specific practice area) than they would be if you were a corporate associate (even if both associates would have the same pay/desireability). In certain practice groups, that difference can be fairly stark. For example, my understanding is that folks that join a tax specialist group will almost universally end up in a dedicated tax role (which is a pretty specialized career) throughout the remainder of their career (i.e. tax associates don't really lateral to another firm to start off as a corporate associate; if they were to do so, it would be a re-tooling and a starting over of sorts). There will of course be exceptions, but I think that's the general rule of thumb.

The other thing to keep in mind, which I think is especially important given the above point, is that by choosing a "general corporate" group and avoiding a specialist group, you essentially keep your options open. The idea here is that there are a broad variety of corporate-type positions that you can be arguably qualified for after a few years as a general corporate associate. Many of those positions actively seek someone that has a broad range of experience across the general corporate spectrum. And if you do end up finding a niche within the general corporate realm, you can still almost certainly pursue that niche post-biglaw (i.e., you can obviously get a specialized corporate gig when going in-house). In comparison, though there are often sub-specialities within specialist groups, the range of options that you will have within a specialist group are typically more narrow/focused than the options you would have if you did general corporate. Thus, choosing a general corporate group carries the benefit that you buy yourself some time to figure out which areas of corporate law (if any in particular) you particularly enjoy, and to choose a general corporate role post-biglaw if none. Whereas in a specialist group, you have to commit basically immediately to being prepared to working within what is likely to be a much more narrow set of probable lateral and post-biglaw careers.

I imagine that your chances at making partner in a corporate vs specialist group will depend upon the firm. I'm not sure if there is a rule of thumb to go by there. If anything, I would imagine that if you expect that you will have not stellar client relationship/biz management skills, you would be relatively more likely to make partner in a specialist group (which often services other groups' clients) than in a corporate group (which usually brings in the business). In other words, you can probably more reliably make partner based upon your legal skill/talent in a specialist group than in a corporate group (which may be more based upon luck, existing or built relationships, social skills, etc). But that's just an off-hand thought.

Other thoughts: It's not impossible to switch practice groups, but it's also not usually the easiest thing in the world. If anything, it's almost certainly easier to switch from a specialist group to a general corporate group versus the other way around. But even if you are able to find a gig in a new practice group, there's a decent chance that you will take a class year cut or two - which can be especially brutal if you were about to enter your third and fourth years (which much higher pay increases) if you had stayed in your original practice group.

Looking forward to everyone's thoughts or qualifications on the above. This is just from my experience.

jimmythecatdied6

Bronze
Posts: 206
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:42 am

Re: Practice Group (Help!!)

Post by jimmythecatdied6 » Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:01 pm

^^ that is an overwhelming amount of text for what should be a simple response. You should work for the people you like the most/work best with.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Practice Group (Help!!)

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:06 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 1:39 pm
I think it may depend on how your firm structures your practice groups. Based upon your post, it sounds like if you choose a "specialist" group then you won't actually be considered part of the broader corporate umbrella (i.e., you will not routinely receive some percentage of your work as general corporate work and you will not be able to pivot to accepting more general corporate work unless you formally switch your practice group or somehow work outside of your practice group, which may require an awkward discussion with your practice group's leadership).

If that's the case, then I think it's unfortunately an actually pretty important question as to whether you are ready to commit to a specialist group.

I think the "employable/lateral" question has a few parts. Depending on the specialist group, you may have better, worse or exactly the same "employability" as a general corporate associate (when looking at employability generally, like in terms of job offers at certain pay scales and being able to count on being able to find a job to either lateral or ultimately move post-biglaw). I see it as basically two things to keep in mind. The first is that if you choose to be in a specialist group, then you will likely remain within that specialist group (unless you pivot, which is not impossible) for your biglaw career and thus accept a post-biglaw job that corresponds to that specialist group. In other words, if you enter a real estate/labor/bankruptcy group, then both the biglaw and in-house options that are open to you will be substantively different (i.e. focused on that specific practice area) than they would be if you were a corporate associate (even if both associates would have the same pay/desireability). In certain practice groups, that difference can be fairly stark. For example, my understanding is that folks that join a tax specialist group will almost universally end up in a dedicated tax role (which is a pretty specialized career) throughout the remainder of their career (i.e. tax associates don't really lateral to another firm to start off as a corporate associate; if they were to do so, it would be a re-tooling and a starting over of sorts). There will of course be exceptions, but I think that's the general rule of thumb.

The other thing to keep in mind, which I think is especially important given the above point, is that by choosing a "general corporate" group and avoiding a specialist group, you essentially keep your options open. The idea here is that there are a broad variety of corporate-type positions that you can be arguably qualified for after a few years as a general corporate associate. Many of those positions actively seek someone that has a broad range of experience across the general corporate spectrum. And if you do end up finding a niche within the general corporate realm, you can still almost certainly pursue that niche post-biglaw (i.e., you can obviously get a specialized corporate gig when going in-house). In comparison, though there are often sub-specialities within specialist groups, the range of options that you will have within a specialist group are typically more narrow/focused than the options you would have if you did general corporate. Thus, choosing a general corporate group carries the benefit that you buy yourself some time to figure out which areas of corporate law (if any in particular) you particularly enjoy, and to choose a general corporate role post-biglaw if none. Whereas in a specialist group, you have to commit basically immediately to being prepared to working within what is likely to be a much more narrow set of probable lateral and post-biglaw careers.

I imagine that your chances at making partner in a corporate vs specialist group will depend upon the firm. I'm not sure if there is a rule of thumb to go by there. If anything, I would imagine that if you expect that you will have not stellar client relationship/biz management skills, you would be relatively more likely to make partner in a specialist group (which often services other groups' clients) than in a corporate group (which usually brings in the business). In other words, you can probably more reliably make partner based upon your legal skill/talent in a specialist group than in a corporate group (which may be more based upon luck, existing or built relationships, social skills, etc). But that's just an off-hand thought.

Other thoughts: It's not impossible to switch practice groups, but it's also not usually the easiest thing in the world. If anything, it's almost certainly easier to switch from a specialist group to a general corporate group versus the other way around. But even if you are able to find a gig in a new practice group, there's a decent chance that you will take a class year cut or two - which can be especially brutal if you were about to enter your third and fourth years (which much higher pay increases) if you had stayed in your original practice group.

Looking forward to everyone's thoughts or qualifications on the above. This is just from my experience.
This is incredibly helpful!! Thank you so much for taking the time to write this!

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Practice Group (Help!!)

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Jun 11, 2021 3:38 pm

I’ll offer a different perspective. I’m in the L&E group at a V20-40 with only equity partnership. It’s pretty difficult to make partner in my group. We have several senior L&E associates currently eligible for partner, but historically, the group makes only one new L&E partner every 3-4 years. It can also take closer to 10-12 years to make partner in my group (and even in the general litigation section too), whereas corporate associates generally make it in 8-9 years. At least in my non-NY office, if you’re still around as a senior corporate associate, the odds are pretty good that you’ll make partner. I think this is in part because the firm’s rates for corporate partners are slightly higher than the rates for some other groups (although I believe associate billing rates are the same among groups). Fortunately, it won’t be too difficult to find an in-house L&E position if I get pushed out.

Accordingly, I’d recommend taking a closer look at what the path to partnership looks like at your specific firm for the different groups. Pull up the new partner announcements from the last 5 years and see what practice groups the people are in (and compare it to practice group size) so you have a better idea of your odds.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Practice Group (Help!!)

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Jun 11, 2021 3:38 pm

[Duplicate]

Idontwanttomakeaname

New
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 2:51 pm

Re: Practice Group (Help!!)

Post by Idontwanttomakeaname » Sat Jun 12, 2021 1:30 pm

Obligatory - as a law student, you should not pick your practice area based upon likelihood of making partner. The probability that you will want to make partner in a corporate group after actually having practiced is quite low so you should be thinking much more about exits options on the assumption you, like virtually everyone else, will one day end up leaving.

Anonymous User
Posts: 428123
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Practice Group (Help!!)

Post by Anonymous User » Sat Jun 12, 2021 2:21 pm

As a junior, you want to avoid closing the door to different types of exposure.

In normal times, you would not get a complete image of what practice or a group is truly like because the summer is one big first date, and you’re being courted. But this is especially true during a remote summer. My niche group is actively hiding how bad the current morale is from the summer associates and are barely giving the summers work because no one has time to teach them. So you’re not getting any true impression of what it’s like- instead of one big first date, you’re getting a FaceTime date. And you might find in a year that you hate the practice, the group, the firm, any of it. You may not, you may love them! But can you say that for certain?

That goes to say though that the more specialized the practice, the harder it is to find lateral positions or anything out of BigLaw. If I could choose again, I would have picked the practice area that gave me the most variety of corporate exposure so that I had more to sell and could tailor my career towards my own interests. As it is, I’ve had to explain in interviews why my current practice still qualifies me for a lot of corporate job descriptions, and more senior associates than I am can’t find anything because it’s so specialized. So think carefully about what bag of goodies and sentiments you’re being sold and whether you trust it enough to shut exit options.

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “Legal Employment”