Banking / Consulting / Law Forum

[QwertyKeys]

All are attractive industries, but all have some drawbacks...

Banking has shit hours (to me there is a material difference between 60-70 and 80-100 -- fine with the former but questioning the latter),

Consulting requires extensive travel,

and law would mean more time in school as well as six figure debt. There's also the matter of the billable hour; as I understand it you work less as you become more senior in consulting and banking, whereas this is not the case in law (you'd have more control over when you're working, but I have serious reservations about entering an industry where revenue is correlated 1:1 with time spent working).

Law also does not have great exit opps..biglaw or in house where you're stuck making $200k with limited upside potential.

Things to consider for some more color... current rising sophomore at a target with mediocre GPA (3.7). Could kill the LSAT (scored mid 160s 2 years ago with no prep and am very confident I could raise 10 or so points with some prep. I've always heard that one should find what they're good at and the money will follow. Problem is, I'm good but not great at the skills used for positions in all of the aforementioned fields -- decent quantitative skills, logical, pretty good academic writer, very detailed oriented. I'm probably better with words than numbers, if I had to choose. I'm a relatively social guy, but not super salesy or an extreme people person. I have multiple contacts in biglaw, to the extent that I'd essentially have a guaranteed job as long as I go to a t14 and don't self destruct. I would enjoy a role where I can build and use my analytical and technical skills and have an actual impact (my findings, recommendations, etc. would be used) though I recognize the impactful part may not come until I'm a decade or 3 into my career.

My dream role would be high level corp strat at a F500. I want to get paid and have an impact ($$ is more important).

I'm super green and don't know what I want to do w my career. Any advice is appreciated.

[QContinuum]

Welcome to TLS!

You should only go to law school if you feel a burning desire to be a lawyer. This is because in general, law is not an "easy" path to riches, and it's tough enough to succeed long-term and avoid burnout even if you're truly passionate about legal practice.

I'm not detecting this passion in you. Which is perfectly fine! This is not a criticism at all. It just means that, at least at this point, law school doesn't sound like the best option for you. You're only a sophomore. Why not explore other possibilities first - say, banking - and see where you find yourself? Law school ain't going anywhere. You have plenty of time to explore different majors, try ibanking/consulting for a few years after college, then see where you find yourself. Don't prematurely lock yourself into law.

Also, a minor point:

I have multiple contacts in biglaw, to the extent that I'd essentially have a guaranteed job as long as I go to a t14 and don't self destruct.

To be sure, the T13 (note, not T14) are "BigLaw-secure" pretty much to the maximal extent reasonably possible. That said, unless your "multiple contacts in BigLaw" are in the nature of your Dad being a managing partner, or something like that, I wouldn't put too much stock in your personal connections. At the entry level, BigLaw hiring is surprisingly meritocratic. If - purely hypothetically - you ended up with median 1L grades at Cornell, you aren't going to land a spot at Wachtell even if you happen to have "multiple contacts" there.

[mickey_mouse]

I worked in management consulting (doing the strat work you describe) before going to law school (and even interned at one during 3L), and am now in biglaw. My intellectual profile is fairly similar to yours: Went to T14 LS (you probably go to a better undergrad though), consider myself a logical thinker and good writer, better and more comfortable with words than with numbers (overall fine with both, was more a question of what I like), introverted but social as the job requires. I grapple with whether I made the right decision to go to LS on a weekly basis. Before LS, I had resigned myself to going to LS or MBA at some point (looking back, this was probably the core assumption that I should not have assumed), and to me LS was a quicker way to get where I thought I wanted to go (it's three years, but I did it earlier in my career, meaning the opportunity cost was lower than if I had waited ~5 years to go to MBA. This also may be a regret -- not sure why I was so eager to get back to school). Of course, an MBA is not required in the biz world, though I feared I would have had a ceiling on my career if I only had an undergrad degree from a mediocre school. Now, I work in a type of corporate law that does allow early exit options (in-house, or ideally pseudo-legal/JD-advantage type positions), though you're right to point out that earnings may be pretty "capped" in the ~200k range in the short- to medium-term; not sure F500 strat that you describe as your "dream job" is that different though.

Look, I left consulting because I didn't see our strategy recs really making a difference in how our clients operated or made decisions. They take your pretty decks and put them on shelves. Perhaps I should have waited it out a few years to move into a strat/ops role at an F500 where you're involved in the day-to-day, listened to, etc. As an attorney (even a junior attorney, like I am now), I'm sometimes the only attorney in a room of biz people and asked to make a legal/risk recommendations based on my training as an attorney (note: this may be specific to my practice/practice area). It's acknowledged you do have a set of skills and expertise (even if biz people do hate you and think of you as "deal killers"). That said, most of the day is dreadfully boring contracts, markups etc. Is that any better than creating an excel workbook and turning it into a deck like you'd be doing as a consultant (and, similarly, as a banker)? Idk, YMMV.

I remember reading through much of this thread when I was deciding and found it helpful: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 4&t=238993 (Voyager consulting thread)

At the end of the day, I do think the differences between the two might be a little overblown. They're professional services/client services businesses, and your hours are at the whim of client demands. Neither are really creating any new value, but extracting value from things already created. As a consultant, often times your figuring ways to make processes or assets more efficient; as an attorney, you're the guy in the middle, shuffling paperwork around for other peoples' deals.

You may work more hours in biglaw, but with the weekly travelling of consulting, it probably nets out to a pretty similar number. As a junior associate in either industry, you can be stuck doing pretty mundane, mindless work, and don't really see the impact of your actions (if in fact your actions have any impact at all). As you move up to partner level, you're more focused on winning new business and schmoozing.

So then the key consideration becomes exit options. After a few years of consulting at a big-time firm, doors can open for you at startups, F500, etc. If you're going into law and know you don't want to be a partner, just make sure you choose a practice that has good and early exit options. There's plenty of advice on that in these forums, or PM if you want to hear more about my practice/experience (coming from a consulting background, I'm as happy as I can be in the law and my potential exit ops).

As an aside, I'd recommend reading Peter Thiel's book, Zero to One. Say what you want about the guy, but he has an interesting perspective on careers, formal education, etc. It's something I wish I'd been introduced to when I was younger (i.e., your age). You acknowledge that getting paid is a primary motivation, which is fair enough, but I'd just ask that you really think about that. What's the point in defining yourself or your career goals by the number you see on a slip of paper every two weeks? And if you actually want to make an impact, I don't think consulting or the law are the most effective ways to do that, though a decent amount of ultimately successful/impactful people do start out in these fields (and likely more do not).

whoa... july 4 week is slow. back to work.

[QwertyKeys]

Not sure how to mention people in replies...

I appreciate both the responses, QContinuum and Mickey_Mouse.

First, thanks for the welcome; I've been lurking for a few years and appreciate the work y'all do here.

You're correct that I don't, at this point in my life, have a burning desire to be a lawyer. Even though I've talked briefly with family and friends in the industry and done some light reading here and on other sites, I don't think one can get a robust picture of a given industry without first working in said industry.

The reason I want to start gathering more information is that I feel like I need to start preparing now. In my mind (and I could easily be wrong) the experiences and credentials I'd need to be an attractive candidate for any of the three industries are a little bit different, and I want to start working on those things now to become a more competitive candidate. For banking or law, I'd need to start seriously focusing on recruiting now (have done a little networking and have an internship at a consultancy, but I would want to ramp up my efforts). I want to balance positioning myself to be a strong candidate in my desired field, but I also want to gain exposure to all three, so I figure out what I really want. You're right, of course, that I have time to figure this stuff out, and people seem to pivot careers more frequently now than in the past. How would you go about doing this? My idea is to possibly focus the majority of my efforts on banking and/or consulting since those have earlier recruiting timelines. I would try to become more familiar with the law while reducing opportunity cost by taking an off-cycle internship or shadowing position. Does this sound reasonable?

You're right that I absolutely should not be relying purely on my contacts for a job; I meant to say that I know a lot more lawyers than I do bankers and consultants, and was wondering if this is in any way relevant to future prospects or a plan of action.

I mention exit options mainly because I am unsure of what exactly I want to do and question the long term viability of any of these careers. If I were at a law firm, I wouldn't rule out taking a shot at partnership; this would probably be my first choice (if in law). I wonder, though, how viable that is. Do you think partnership will become more obtainable as boomers begin to retire and the field potentially becomes less saturated? Or do you think low partnership prospects are now a permanent, structural reality in large law firms with well compensated junior attorneys?

I probably overemphasized my concern with compensation. I'd like to be paid well, but the type of work I'd be doing absolutely matters to me. I think I'd enjoy analytical work, but I do recognize that pretty much anywhere you''ll probably be doing pretty arduous, process oriented work at the beginning of your career.

[totesTheGoat]

very detailed oriented.

I larfed.

Things to consider for some more color... current rising sophomore at a target with mediocre GPA (3.7).. . . My dream role would be high level corp strat at a F500. I want to get paid and have an impact ($$ is more important).

In your shoes, I'd take a huge step back and focus on getting good grades in an employable major. No offense, but your posts are dripping with ego, naivete and unbridled ambition. You're gonna get steamrolled by real life if you don't slow down and focus on the present. I mean, you're already talking about exit ops for a biglaw career that you wouldn't even be eligible to start, best case, for another 6 years. When you're 18 or 19, 6 years is an eternity! When I was your age, I was an aeronautical engineering student hoping to work for NASA. 6 years later, I was a newly married software engineer living 1000 miles away from home and going to law school at night.

Here's my most earnest and serious advice: spend the next 3 years of your undergraduate career getting the best damn grades you can in an employable major. Then, go live in the real world for a few years, paying bills and rubbing elbows with normal people. Then, after you experience a few years of real life, consider your grad school options. Nothing you do now (short of crappy grades) is gonna shut the door on law school.

[QwertyKeys]

very detailed oriented.

I larfed.

Alright, that was pretty funny. Not the best spot for me to make that error lol.

In your shoes, I'd take a huge step back and focus on getting good grades in an employable major. No offense, but your posts are dripping with ego, naivete and unbridled ambition. You're gonna get steamrolled by real life if you don't slow down and focus on the present. I mean, you're already talking about exit ops for a biglaw career that you wouldn't even be eligible to start, best case, for another 6 years. When you're 18 or 19, 6 years is an eternity! When I was your age, I was an aeronautical engineering student hoping to work for NASA. 6 years later, I was a newly married software engineer living 1000 miles away from home and going to law school at night.

Appreciate the advice. I don't think I have that much of an ego, but rereading my post I can see how it could've come off that way and that wasn't my intent. I think (hope) I don't come off like that in person. I made a lot of assumptions in my original post that I probably shouldn't have, and I know that any of the outcomes I mentioned would take lots of work and some luck as well -- they'd be upside scenarios for sure. I have a tendency to over plan, but I think you're right I should focus more on the present. I absolutely am naive, so was looking to get some perspective from people who are older and wiser than I am.

[DerKatze]

The reason I want to start gathering more information is that I feel like I need to start preparing now. In my mind (and I could easily be wrong) the experiences and credentials I'd need to be an attractive candidate for any of the three industries are a little bit different, and I want to start working on those things now to become a more competitive candidate. For banking or law, I'd need to start seriously focusing on recruiting now (have done a little networking and have an internship at a consultancy, but I would want to ramp up my efforts). I want to balance positioning myself to be a strong candidate in my desired field, but I also want to gain exposure to all three, so I figure out what I really want. You're right, of course, that I have time to figure this stuff out, and people seem to pivot careers more frequently now than in the past. How would you go about doing this? My idea is to possibly focus the majority of my efforts on banking and/or consulting since those have earlier recruiting timelines. I would try to become more familiar with the law while reducing opportunity cost by taking an off-cycle internship or shadowing position. Does this sound reasonable?

Some of these assumptions are wrong. Except for Yale and Stanford, the only two things that really matter getting into a good law school are your LSAT and GPA. You don't need to do any networking, especially not before law school, for law. There's nothing stopping you from going either banking or consulting > law. And doing banking or consulting before law school would help getting into biglaw. So if you're undecided, I would try to do banking or consulting. You can always do law school later.

I'm not sure what the whole "You're gonna get steamrolled by real life if you don't slow down and focus on the present." That comment seemed more naive than any of your posts. Real people do, in fact, get into prestigous banking or consulting jobs. And most of those people do what you are doing right now. Not saying the person who made that comment will, but in general, people who make comments like the poster above will also ridicule you for taking one of the jobs you are talking about (consulting or banking). So if you want to get one of those jobs, just don't listen to those people.

Depending on what kind of target school you mean, 3.7 isn't bad at all. I know at Duke even McKinsey only makes first cut at 3.7. Certainly you can get banking jobs. Maybe not Harvard Law or above unless it improves a lot, but other law schools are still open to you. You have more like an average GPA.