For those that have jumped in-house relatively early (after 2 or 3 years in biglaw), do you wish you would have stayed longer in biglaw? To any in-house folks of any level that have seen juniors go in-house, please share any anecdotes on what differentiates those that may be “ready” to go in-house versus those that should have probably gotten more experience before making the jump.
I’m a corporate associate at a V10, mix of m&a and capital markets. No issues with my firm and glad to stay until when makes the most sense to exit. Thinking through options and haven’t tested the market yet. Thanks for any responses.
Considerations with going in-house early 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: 432496
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
