Law Firms with Different Entry Policies & Your Reaction

Two different career situations present themselves if you find two law firms with very generous admission policies, one of which compensates its partners on the basis of subjective performance evaluations and the other on the basis of seniority. In some respects the question can be simplified to "What does it mean to be a partner?"Is partnership designed to attract and hold only the very best lawyers, paying them essentially as equals throughout their careers, or is it designed to keep as many lawyers as is reasonably possible and compensate them at different levels based on some evaluation of each lawyer's contribution? Your reaction as to what type of policy you prefer should be tested by asking yourself what type of policy you would prefer as an associate or a partner.
 

Does the firm have a pro bono practice? Does it have a formal pro bono program in place? Are associates encouraged to participate in the program? How is the work of the associates in such a program evaluated? Is there a limit to the amount of work I can do?


The existence of pro bono programs in law firms and corporations tends to mirror associate interest in such programs. Over the last few years many firms have had a difficult time finding a sufficient number of associates to perform the pro bono work which may come into the office. Nonetheless, a great many firms have formal pro bono programs, in some instances with a quite sophisticated practice. A key to evaluating the real relevance of a pro bono practice in a given firm lies in how the work performed in that program is evaluated. If your pro bono work is evaluated in the same fashion your other work is evaluated, you can be reasonably well assured that the firm takes that part of its practice as seriously as it takes any other.

Firms may be reluctant to tell you there is a limit to the amount of pro bono work which you can do. But remember that the practice of law is a business; reasonable attention to pro bono practice and community affairs is desirable for a variety of reasons. Excessive or exclusive attention to them, however, is not in the best long-run interests of the associate or the firm.

1. What are the attrition rates?

Questions with respect to attrition rates often miss the mark. That is particularly true in the instance of corporations with large legal departments and large law firms. The more relevant question in each of those situations is what are the attrition rates, or conversely the admission or promotion rates, for associates or associate counsels in the relevant decision years. In other words, in the case of a large law firm whose partnership admission policies call for evaluation of prospective admission within seven years, it is important to know how many associates in the seventh year became partners; it is not terribly important to know how many of the associates who began with the firm in year one remained to become partners in year seven. Answers to questions of attrition in firms that make partnership decisions principally on the basis of economics are largely irrelevant except insofar as they indicate wide spread associate unrest. Moreover, if there is such unrest, you will hear of it before any analysis can be made of the significance of attrition rates.

Another relevant inquiry regarding attrition is where the lawyers who leave find employment? If you see what appears to be a high turnover but that turnover is matched by extraordinary placement, you have a situation different from the one in which people are leaving simply because of working conditions at that particular institution.

All in all, extraordinary turnover may or may not be cause for concern. In this day and age of huge law firms, legal departments, and agency legal staffs, excessive turnover is hard to define. Each succeeding generation of law students is seemingly more mobile and is presented with more opportunities in both legal and non-legal situations. These factors also make it difficult to attach real meaning to the abstract concept of attrition.

2. Am I expected to bill a certain number of hours or dollars? How many hours on an average do each associate work? Is any part of my bonus (if that particular firm or institution offers a bonus) or compensation determined on the basis of hours billed? Or on the basis of bills collected? Are admission or promotion decisions based in part on hours worked? Or on bills collected?

The importance of the answers to these questions is obvious. As an aside, you may find more direct and meaningful answers when this question is asked of associates. In any event, most senior lawyers believe that every prospective associate should be prepared to work hard; the definition of "hard" will depend almost entirely upon the environment. As of the writing of this book, the average associate in major New York and Washington law firms probably bills from 2,000 to 2,500 hours per year. That average number is lower on the west coast and in the southwest. Hours worked in corporate law departments and government agencies tend to be even less, and compensation generally reflects the difference in hours. In view of the profit "squeeze" in many law firms, it is safe to assume there will be no widespread downward pressure on bill able hours.

Some law firms actually advance people based in part upon the aggregate number of hours worked. For example, an associate who had billed the firm's average number of hours for an associate over a seven-year-period in a six-year-period might be considered for partner a year earlier than his or her classmates. Of course actions speak louder than words. You will no doubt be more comfortable if there are instances where such advancement has occurred.

The question of hours billed is a critical one. It is critical not so much because it tells you whether or not a given institution is a "sweat-shop" (which you can determine by conversation among your classmates without regard to the specifics of how many hours you are expected to bill), but because you have to know the rules of the game, what is expected of you, if you are to succeed in any environment, including a law firm environment.

The answer to the question about collections is equally important. If you are responsible for collections, it puts addition al, but perhaps justified (at least in later years) pressure on you.

What is the firm's view of political and civic involvement?

Almost every law firm will encourage its associates to be active in the community. That activity can take several forms. For example, one might be active in church or religious life, political campaigns, or with specific charitable or other benevolent endeavors. It is important to understand the firm's commitment to the community so that you have a sense of what might or might not be expected of you over the course of your years of practice, including those as a partner. Many firms would relish an interest shown by their associates in activities outside the firm. Those activities often result in relationships which, in turn, result in continued business or in the acquisition of new clients. In addition, the activities of law years in the community help promote the general image of the firm. Nonetheless, outside activities can undermine ultimate success if they take too much time away from the legitimate demands of the office.

There are situations in which certain kinds of political and social involvements may not turn out to be career enhancing. Although experience shows the instances of such activity to be the exception rather than the rule, no doubt there are firms whose management is not enthralled about the prospect of an associate working on a political campaign for candidates (or a controversial ballot proposition) whose interests might be deemed not in the best interests of the firm or its clients. Clients have unpredictable reactions to "members of their law firm" being actively involved in an effort perceived by the client to be against the client's best interest.

In any event, it behooves every prospective kingmaker or candidate to understand the political background of his or her particular law firm. Obviously, the best of all worlds is complete balance where there are partners involved in both Republican and Democratic campaigns, in Christian and Jewish religious and charitable activities, and in conservative and liberal social and political causes. Firms with that political, social and economical mix are not common, but they do exist.

3. How is the firm governed? Do associates, or younger partners, have a meaningful voice in the management of the firm?

Again, the answers given in this question will reveal quite a bit about the firm you are considering. If the firm is essentially managed or administered by a single or a relatively few number of partners, you will have a totally different environment than you will have in a firm which is truly democratic. There are firms where important matters are actually submitted to a vote of the partners. Before you necessarily conclude that form of government is best, remember that there is a real need, particularly in larger institutions, for management, efficient operation, direction, and strategic planning. The presence of these management skills does not necessarily mean that all sense of inter personal relationship and democracy disappears; the existence of sound management and efficient operation may simply mean a more profitable and harmonious working environment. On the other hand, a highly centralized management system may penalize those who hold or express views for the future of the firm contrary to those of existing management. Again, the answers to these questions simply provide additional information to help you interview and evaluate a particular institution more successfully.`

In analyzing answers to other questions, the concepts of strategic planning and professional management have been mentioned. As noted, the existence of these characteristics is crucial to the future progress of a firm, corporation or agency. In most cases, you will have more of an opportunity to discuss these issues when you visit the institution. Take advantage of the opportunity.

One of the key questions with respect to firm government is who chooses management's successors? You will find a surprising number of situations in which members of the management committee or executive committee (or whatever name happens to be appended to the governing body of the firm that interests you) simply sit down and among themselves select their successors. Although you may find it hard to believe, in many instances they select themselves. Moreover, there are a number of situations in which they are the best choices. That process may work perfectly well, but it does not provide the same opportunity for promotion of those with different viewpoints. On the other hand, a method of succession based generally on seniority may be substantially less disruptive than holding distasteful elections or referendums among partners on a yearly or biannual basis.

Another question with respect to management is what role is played by associates and younger partners. In many firms you will find associates taking prominent roles in recruiting and even in the evaluation of other associates. Although that might be an extreme, many firms find ways for associates to become involved in the management and direction of the law firm, all on the quite correct assumption that it is their future and, as a result, they ought to be interested in it. This question leads quite logically to the next.

4. What does a partnership mean? Are there tiers of partnership or junior and senior partners?

These questions are obviously tied to partnership admission policies and firm management or governance. It also has quite an obvious economic impact on your career. Many firms recruit associates on the basis that, if they stay and perform as the firm expects them to perform, they will be admitted to partnership without regard to the number of associates remaining in their class at the time admission is considered. Firms that adopt this posture tend more often than not to be located in the west and southwest. As a general rule, firms on the eastern seaboard recruit law students with substantially fewer promises about partnership admission. It is not uncommon for large firms in the east to adopt as an admission policy, even though it may not be stated explicitly, a position that the question of admission is one which they will consider when, as, and if appropriate, but totally within their discretion. A firm with that type of admission policy bespeaks a substantially different environment, particularly for an associate, from that of the firm first described. On the other hand, the policy at the latter firm may result in a substantial difference in the way partners are treated and feel about themselves and their partners. In other words, a more generous liberal admission policy can, although it need not, result in the admission of a sufficient number of additional partners which dilutes the average partner's earnings to a substantially greater extent than the admission of partners to a firm that maintains a very rigid and perhaps even arbitrary and capricious admission policy. In the latter instance, you are apt to find fewer partners, a higher associate-partner ratio, and a greater average partner income.

If you find a firm which has either a de jure or de facto policy of a partnership comprised of partners treated differently within the same class, that has certain implications with respect to partner income and a sense of harmony among the partners. While it may seem obvious that no group of people will progress and grow at exactly the same rate, many law firms make just that assumption and pay all partners in a given class the same throughout their careers. To the extent the partnership is profitable and each of the partners is comfortable with his or her income level, that type of arrangement is ideal. In the unfortunate event that the profitability of the partnership varies from year to year, that kind of arrangement can cause resentment on the part of the partners who perceive themselves to be contributing to a greater extent. It can also cause a substantial frustration among those who will acknowledge that their contribution is not as great as some of their peers.

In any event, it is generally acknowledged that a "jump-ball" partnership compensation arrangement is probably to be avoided. Yearly meetings at which partners argue among themselves about who should receive what without any institutional guidelines as to advancement tend to be disruptive, encourage partner turnover, and enhance the probability of firm split-offs. Some may argue that such matters are premature for law student consideration. This relevance, however, becomes apparent when you realize that you may be a partner in a firm five times longer than you will be an associate.

5. What do associates do?

The ideal way to ask this question is to ask more than one of the associates with whom you visit what they do and what they expect to be doing in the future. Of course it is difficult to ask questions of people who are not likely to be present, at least in significant numbers, in the law school interview. If an associate is conducting the interview, and that will occur in a surprising number of instances, be sure you pursue the matter. If a partner is the interviewer, do not be put off. It is the job of the interviewer to anticipate questions and have the answers; one might reasonably assume one would be interested in what he or she might be doing. Consequently, you should feel free to address the issue. You might also learn something about the depth of knowledge the interviewer has about what young lawyers in the office actually do!