Associates to watch? 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: 432765
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Associates to watch?
I’ve noticed on Chambers bands they sometimes list a few associates as “Associates to Watch” under any given practice. Any idea how these associates get this recognition? Seems wildly premature but maybe they really are star associates?
-
Lawman1865

- Posts: 115
- Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:30 pm
Re: Associates to watch?
Chambers explanation seems to be, "senior associates who are recognised for their work in the background of major deals" (see https://chambers.com/info/the-rankings-explained).Anonymous User wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 10:27 pmI’ve noticed on Chambers bands they sometimes list a few associates as “Associates to Watch” under any given practice. Any idea how these associates get this recognition? Seems wildly premature but maybe they really are star associates?
This seems like a pretty silly ranking to me, unless there are factors they are looking at other than being a senior associate who happens to have been on a number of major deals.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 432765
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Associates to watch?
Interesting, I hadn’t seen these explanations before so thanks for sharing. I don’t think I’ve ever seen (or at least noticed) the Star Associate designation which seems to be less common.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 432765
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Associates to watch?
My understanding is that law firms must submit an application on behalf of the associate, with references, etc. That means there will be a lot of false negatives, since many won't bother. But, if your firm is submitting an application, and they pick you, then Chambers picks your application above others, it means at least something.
-
12YrsAnAssociate

- Posts: 221
- Joined: Thu May 21, 2020 3:03 pm
Re: Associates to watch?
Market paying firms should do a law student draft, complete with pre-draft combines, prospect watch highlight segments featuring Mel Kiper Jr., and tanking by middling firms to land top picks.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
Antetrust

- Posts: 76
- Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2022 10:10 am
Re: Associates to watch?
lol12YrsAnAssociate wrote: ↑Fri Dec 16, 2022 2:54 pmMarket paying firms should do a law student draft, complete with pre-draft combines, prospect watch highlight segments featuring Mel Kiper Jr., and tanking by middling firms to land top picks.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 432765
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Associates to watch?
Combines can include WPM rankings and draftees can put together a highlight reel of cold calls.12YrsAnAssociate wrote: ↑Fri Dec 16, 2022 2:54 pmMarket paying firms should do a law student draft, complete with pre-draft combines, prospect watch highlight segments featuring Mel Kiper Jr., and tanking by middling firms to land top picks.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 432765
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Associates to watch?
For smaller firms and/or overseas offices of large firms, sometimes they just list every associate in the office, so take with a grain of salt… firm submits all the associates’ names to make the practice group seem more substantial.
Means nothing.
Means nothing.