There are things we wish you knew; things we wish we could tell you, both attorneys and law firms, but, frankly, we are ascared. Scared you won't listen. Scared you will listen. Scared you'll listen and ignore us. More importantly, scared it won't matter.
However, JoeRecruiter, after, frankly, YEARS of listening to the whining, the crying, the shrill, constant BEGGING, is here for you, my young scholars. Yes, like Sister Mary, I'm going to "Explain It All" for you. With considerably less bloodshed, I hope. And infinitely less humor.
First, the rules. We gots to have rules. They are few, but vital. First, this is a collection of wisdom gleaned, collected, in some cases beaten out of Legal Recruiters, Associates, Law Firms, Law Firm Recruiters, and various and sundry other folks, some of them even more unsavory than the abovementioned. Second, all the stories are to some extent true. That is to say, the essential facts are true. However, I might have changed a fact here or there to protect the name of a BigLaw firm, for which I doubt I'll ever receive any credit. On the other hand, I might have blamed a BigLaw firm when really it was Ma-N-Pa-Law. I'm crafty that way. Third, you will most likely recognize yourself in these lines, so don't look too closely. Fourth, in the movies, you learned that, sometimes, resistance is NOT futile. Here, it almost certainly is.
So, what is it about Law Firms, and Law Firm Recruiting in general, that generates SO MUCH trouble in the profession? Could it be that Lawyers are just dyspeptic in general? (Yes). Could it be that the very things that make them good at Lawyering are the very things that lead to so much professional dissatisfaction? (Yes). Could it be that I'm just wasting time trying to find out how to lead in to the cold, bloody meat of the subject? (Again, yes).
Here it is then: Lawyers are trained to be unsatisfied with surface elements, to dig and probe, and search, and analyze, and look even deeper. Applied to themselves, this quickly becomes a source of immense professional dissatisfaction. Some, who, prior to this awareness were always capable of sublimating their dissatisfaction into a drive for performance lose the ability, and they leave the profession.
However, before it gets to that, many in the profession look to change jobs, and that's where I come in. Or rather me and others like me (to be completely accurate, others who aspire to BE like me). Law Firms don't particularly care for outside Legal Recruiters either because they're a) they're dorks; or b) they have WAAAAAAYYYYYY too much time on their hands; or c) both, plus they're filled with control freaks, too; and d) they're tight-asses, and don't know how to spend money wisely. We'll deal with this last one later.
However, it's a total waste of time for most law firms to select lateral associates virtually anytime. First of all, there are too many to go through, unless you have nothing better to do. Second, any really GOOD associate is probably NOT job searching. Like the best partners, s/he is working at a firm, happy as a clam in white sauce, with nary a thought of leaving. Oh, yeah, occasionally s/he'll look up from a file, sniff the air, and wonder "what's it like out there?", but, likely as not, the head will go right back down, nose into the file, and that's the end of it.
Sadly, the real world is nothing at all like Field of Dreams. If you build it THEY will NOT come. The OTHER ONES will come. The ax-grinders. The politically motivated. The ones who're two seconds from turning into lawyer stew. The attorney who visits your portal on her own is looking because s/he HAS to, most of the time.
Legal Recruiters (at least the good ones) find MOST of their candidates at firms where they're already successful, working toward partnership (or already partners), enjoying significant success, and with no plan to leave. So why DO they leave? Because attorneys are attorneys. Face it, most atttorneys, while not easily recognizable as human, have a couple of similar characteristics: Smart, driven, goal-directed, performance-oriented, looking for a challenge, and always, ALWAYS wanting to do, you know, MORE with themselves. It's why they BECAME attorneys in the first place.
WHY WORK WITH A LEGAL RECRUITER?:
1. LAW FIRMS: If you're a law firm, it can make your life a LOT easier. First of all, the recruiter can cut through at least the first and SECOND pass of resumes. Recruiters, unlike lawyers, only get ONE chance to hit the ball out of the park. We may be smelly, unpleasant, evil-tempered, and incivil, but we know what side our bread is buttered on, how much butter is on the bread, and whose knife it was that buttered it. I have less than no interest in sending you one candidate; I want you to hire at least a DOZEN candidates. I want you to call me EVERY time you need to fill a position, because, despite the fact that I'm a VERY SLOW learner, I do one thing VERY well. . .I respond to money. And I don't get paid if I don't find the best possible candidate.
At least, I shouldn't. . . .If your recruiter isn't looking for the best candidates; if s/he just goes around "hanging paper" on you; if they don't actively work to get and keep your business; if your recruiter doesn't say stuff like "I'm looking for a lawyer with a heavy bat" and stuff like that, lose them like a mullet. Your recruiter should be an arrogant snob who only wants to work with the very best lawyers, law firms, staff, and people. S/he should be money-and-performance driven. When you have an opening, s/he should be on you for so much detail, you wonder if they're building your candidate in their garage.
And when they find the right candidate, you should pay and pay and pay and pay. So many law firms have such ridiculous restrictions and conditions on payment that JoeRecruiter won't work for them anymore. Here are the rules: 25% of the first year base comp., payable within 10 days of offer and acceptance. If they leave within 90 days, other than death or incapacitation, you should get another free placement, within 60-90 days. If they die or become incapacitated, you eat it. If a suitable replacement cannot be found, you get a pro-rated refund. However, the law firm should use its best efforts to accept a replacement and not just let the time run in order to collect a refund like some scumbag. Large groups are subject to NEGOTIATION, reasonable NEGOTIATION.
JoeRecruiter knows one BigLaw firm that had a rule that they'd only pay on the first TWO partners in a multi-partner deal. Guess who couldn't find six partners ANYWHERE? The partner group they were wooing knew about this rule, so they held out, refusing to go with BigLaw. They went with the recruiter anyway on another deal, and made sure the recruiter got paid. Only this time, they took associates with them.
Oh, the stories JoeRecruiter could tell. Here's one: BigLawCentral pays, um, "lower than market" anyway, but, if they use a recruiter a second time within a one-year period, they pay even LESS. Guess which recruiter won't work for BLC? Most of them.
Look, you're either PROVIDING dinner, or you ARE dinner. If you don't want to work with a legal recruiter, that's just FINE with JoeRecruiter. . .you just became PREY. Joe will never EVER take candidates from a client firm, EVER. Joe will get up EXTRA early to take candidates from a law firm that doesn't use him for recruiting. Why? Hey, the candidates have to come from SOMEWHERE, and, uh, YOU'RE IT! Just remember, you're either a client, or you're LUNCH. Your call. And, by the way, if you sign a contract with me, but never hire one of my candidates, I'll run, not walk, to cancel that contract, and I'll take your very best pratice group to your number one competitor. I PROMISE you, they'd LOVE to pay my fee.
Bottom line: Legal Recruiters work for a fee. It's a fair amount for the work we do, and we earn it, believe me. In fact, after the first few placements (sometimes, after the FIRST placement) most Law Firm Recruiters are so grateful for the help, we almost become part of their in-house staff. Did I mention we also accept performance bonuses gracefully?
2. CANDIDATES: Why should YOU work with a Legal Recruiter? Well, first of all, when you go to a website, whether it's "LawRUs," or even BigLaw, you become one of a very large pile of resumes that only the truly bored ever look at, and then, only when there's an opening. One BigLaw firm told Joe, when they were explaining why they didn't need him, that they received over 700 resumes a DAY, so they would NEVER need his services. "As you can see," said Hortense the Imperturbable, "we have more people who want to be here than we'll ever have room for." Yeah, sign me up to be part of THAT crowd.
Joe thinks you should find a Legal Recruiter you like, whose personality works for you. If and when a recruiter calls, keep an open mind and ask questions. Send the res. for review if asked. However, make SURE the recruiter knows it's just for REVIEW, and canNOT be submitted without your EXPRESS permission. If you're going to work with a recruiter, I'd work with, at most, ONE at a time, and send general cancellation letters to ALL OTHERS, as well as an authorization letter to that specific recruiter, identifying him or her as your EXCLUSIVE representative for the time being (it could be a week, it could be ONE submission, until further notice, whatever; you're a lawyer, you decide).
Whoever you go with, be prepared to WORK. Your Legal Recruiter is going to try to represent you in your best light, but, remember, s/he has a reputation and an ongoing relationship with most of the people to whom s/he'll be presenting you to. Make sure they know EVERYTHING, good or bad, so they can know how to present you in your best possible light. BTW, if you ever lie to a Legal Recruiter, they'll probably drop you like a hot potato, and the word will spread throughout the legal community that you're poison (they won't say anything; just saying "we no longer represent that person" without elaboration is enough). Just don't do it.
Sometimes Joe is asked if candidates and Recruiters should meet. A LOT of Recruiters say yes. In Joe's experience, these are the Large, Multi-Office SuperRecruiters with a presence in every legal market in the US. But unless you're meeting with YOUR specific recruiter, and that person is PERSONALLY shopping your resume to EACH person to whom they submit, Joe doesn't see a difference. Joe recruits all over the country, and travels all over, in order to meet with clients and candidates, but not at the same time, and not in the same place every time. So it's not always possible to meet personally with every single client OR candidate every single time. It hasn't seemed to have hurt these relationships, but, of course, it'd have to be your call.
Finally, what's with all the movement? Is it ever going to go away? Joe says no, not for a while yet. Part of it is the increasing social mobility in the Lawyering ranks. Part of it is the multiple-profession household. But a lot of it is the broken contract between old line law firms and young attorneys, as much as Joe hates to say it. There was a time when a young attorney came out of school, found a law firm, worked hard for five, six years, and could become partner. There was incentive to stay, to work, to earn, and to learn. Older lawyers in the firm were willing to give up a portion of their ownership in order to insure that the firm would survive them. Younger attorneys were willing to invest time, effort, and the other, more "ineffable" factors in order to become part of something bigger than just their individual contributions. And the cycle perpetuated itself.
Lately though, something has changed. Non-equity Partnerships, Extended Associateships, and all the other formulaic changes have made it clear to young lawyers that there's no longer any guarantee of eventual ownership at many law firms. This has caused a significant number of them to make sure they're always positioned to move, and the smart ones are always prepared to do so. Even partners know that their positions may be untenable in some firms. Accordingly, the movement in the profession has gone from about 6-7% annually to 12+% annually in about a decade with signs that churn will increase over time. What does that mean? More people moving more places more often.
So, what is the future of Legal Recruiting in the United States? Is it likely to change much in the future? JoeRecruiter says "Baby, we're just getting started!"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment