Okay, welcome. Today's webinar is one that, I think, really represents a lot to me. In fact, it's about my life's work—getting attorneys jobs and finding ways for them to get those jobs, and why you shouldn't take it personally if you're not getting interviews. Let me get started with my slideshow.
So, when you're looking for jobs, one of the things I notice most, and want to encourage everyone on this webinar to listen to, is why you're not getting interviews and the reasons for it. In most cases, you should never take it personally. If you're not getting interviews, you may be doing something wrong, but there are also reasons beyond your control. Today, I'm going to talk about those reasons so you don’t take them personally.
I'll also tell you what I do as a recruiter to help my candidates get interviews when facing these issues. I’m not here to recruit you or to tell you how great a recruiter I am at BCG. What I’m doing is sharing 25 years of experience and my life's work helping attorneys find positions. Again, I’ve been doing this for 25 years, and I know a lot about how to get attorneys hired. I’ve seen what happens to thousands, or tens of thousands, of my candidates as they search for jobs, and the reasons they get rejected.
At the outset, I want to make a few points. Regardless of whether you're at a top law firm, went to a top law school, or attended a less prestigious school or firm, you can always get interviews. However, every attorney, whether applying on their own or through BCG, needs to send out many applications to get interviews.
When I say many, I mean it. If you're in a rare location or practice area where there’s high demand and few attorneys, you might not need to apply as widely. But, generally, people apply to 50 or 100 firms before getting an interview. This includes many attorneys. There are various reasons they’re not getting interviews, but smart people know that rejection isn't something to take personally.
Attorneys get used to rejection. You should be used to it from law school when you were rejected for summer associate positions. Even people from top law firms often don’t receive offers. Many times, you're not getting interviews for reasons beyond your control. The only thing within your control is your ability to keep applying and running your job search strategically.
It’s crucial to watch my videos on resume reviews, fix your resume, focus on your practice area, and apply quickly. Treat your job search like a full-time job.
One thing I tell attorneys, and this is important, is that your ability to represent yourself and get a job is no different from your ability to represent a client. If you're a good attorney, you’d fight for your client. You’d file motions, influence judges, and do whatever it takes to win the case. Similarly, you need to fight for your career and find firms to work at. Everything is within your control—your job search locations, the number of applications, and the firms you target.
Many people are scared to apply to multiple places, fearing their current employer might find out. This rarely happens. It's an unwritten rule that attorneys don’t share this information because it would deter others from applying. You need to set aside your ego and fight harder if you’re not succeeding.
If you’ve passed the bar, you can get a job. This means you don’t have to work as a contract attorney or stay unemployed for a long time. You just need to give it your all.
At the beginning of this webinar, I want to stress that you should never give up. You have to go all in, and it works. I used to run a business called Legal Authority, and I’m launching a similar business called BCG Premier. I’ll share the URL after this webinar. Legal Authority helped people apply to all the law firms in a city, regardless of qualifications, and they got jobs. It worked incredibly well, but it became difficult to run due to the complexity of updating data and other challenges. Still, the strategy of applying to every possible place works.
You can also mail your applications instead of emailing them. But the key is to not let your ego get in the way and to do everything possible when applying to firms. I review thousands of applications every year, and about half of them come from unemployed attorneys. You don’t need to be unemployed or work as a contract attorney. Law firms are businesses, and if they can make money hiring you, they will.
You need to conduct a major job search. I’ll talk more about the reasons people don’t get interviews, but the main one is they aren’t applying to enough places.
I’ll also show you how to overcome the obstacles you face. But at the outset, I want you to understand that you are a champion, and you need to push through. Your ability to get a job is no different from your ability to represent a client. If you were representing a client, you’d do everything in your power to help them. You can do the same for yourself when searching for jobs.
This is a live webinar, so I’ll give the presentation and try to provide as much detail as possible. I highly recommend you stay for the entire session, as it could change your life. Many people do. You’re on this webinar with thousands of others, so give it your full attention, take notes, and learn everything you can. The information I’m sharing is priceless, and very few people know it at this level.
've been doing this for so long. After the webinar presentation, I will take a short break of about 2 to 3 minutes. When I return, I'll answer any questions you have about this webinar or anything else related to what I'm discussing. If you have questions during the webinar, you can put them in the chat, and I will answer them after the webinar is complete. We will go for as long as it takes to address all your questions.
Today, I'm going to talk about the top twelve reasons attorneys and law students often face challenges in getting interviews with law firms. I will show you why you're not getting interviews and explain how I would overcome these obstacles as a recruiter. I'll also provide guidance on what you can do for yourself if you're applying to firms, sharing the wisdom I've accumulated to help you navigate the process. As I mentioned earlier, the most common mistake attorneys make when searching for jobs is giving up.
They give up because they lack confidence, their ego gets hurt, and they feel like they can't keep going. They feel the need to settle for something or do something else, and this happens all the time. When attorneys are job hunting, as I said earlier, they often give up. They don't apply to enough places, and that's very unfortunate.
I recently watched a documentary—it wasn't last night, but it was quite interesting. It was about men who traveled to Russia to find brides because, for some reason, they weren't happy with women in the United States or felt women weren't interested in them. The documentary featured men, many in their sixties or older, who were factory workers from the Midwest, meeting and marrying very attractive young women, some as young as 19, at pre-arranged mixers. As I watched this, I realized that if you put enough effort into something, you can find what you're looking for. While this particular situation isn't something I would pursue due to language barriers and other issues, it demonstrated that when these men couldn't find wives in the U.S., they were able to do so elsewhere.
The key takeaway is that you can achieve anything if you put in enough effort. Every attorney is employable. It doesn't matter what practice area you're in, where you went to school, where you're located, how old or young you are—none of that matters. I work with attorneys in their seventies who don’t have any business, and I get them interviews by searching hard, sometimes at 500 to 1,000 firms. There are always people interested in certain types of attorneys from different practice areas. Whatever limitations you think you have, whether it’s your background, experience, or age, they don't define you. You can always find a position if you search hard enough.
Now, if you have a criminal record or something particularly damaging that shows up when people search your name, it will be much harder for you to find a job. But aside from that, you can get a job, and you should never get discouraged. You should never stop looking or give up.
Right now, the legal market is tougher than people realize. Recent labor statistics showed less hiring than expected. On my end, I’m seeing a slowdown in law firm hiring, which is affecting many people. They're having a harder time getting jobs and are getting discouraged, sometimes even thinking of switching careers. Rejection isn’t easy to handle.
When I receive rejection notices from law firms about my candidates, I often take it personally, but I shouldn’t. You shouldn’t either. If you apply to 20 or 30 firms and get one interview, that’s often a very good outcome. There are so many reasons attorneys don’t get jobs, and the legal profession isn't always welcoming. There's a lot of rejection, and much of it is due to economic factors. Law firms are often hesitant to hire, but these reasons shouldn’t concern you too much.
You can’t please everyone, and not everyone is going to buy into what you’re offering. And that's okay. If you don’t get an interview, you shouldn’t feel bad or take it personally. I see attorneys all the time who may not have attended prestigious law schools and apply to big firms, only to feel like they're failing when they don't get interviews. But you're not failing if you don’t get an interview at every firm you apply to.
Often, firms post their openings on LinkedIn, Indeed, LawCrossing, and other platforms, receiving hundreds of applications. They may only interview two or three candidates out of 300 applications. These odds aren’t great, regardless of your qualifications.
Now, let’s talk about the first reason attorneys don’t get interviews, which should be fairly obvious. If a firm has better applicants for the position, they will hire them. It's the same as in dating—not every person you're interested in will be interested in you. Similarly, law firms will always hire the best candidate they can find. You may not always be that candidate, but that’s okay.
Here’s what I do as a recruiter to make people stand out. Many recruiters only focus on the most well-publicized openings at large firms, where rejection is more likely. Attorneys may apply to several recruiters, only to be turned away, and then they give up on their job search. But you should never give up just because you're not getting interviews. That’s crazy.
When a recruiter markets you properly to a wide range of firms, they can often secure interviews for you. I've placed attorneys who you wouldn’t expect to get jobs, simply by applying to enough places. As a recruiter, I promote candidates to firms that may not have advertised openings but are likely to be interested in their background. When you apply to a firm without an opening, you’re often the only applicant, and the firm may be flattered that you applied.
I once had a law firm in Malibu represent my company in various disputes. During the seven or eight years I worked with that firm, only two people ever walked in to drop off their resumes—and one of them was hired. That person was flattered because no one else had applied. This strategy works, and I’ve been monitoring law firms for so long that I know which ones are hiring on an ongoing basis.
The best legal recruiters use this information to match you with the most appropriate firms, and it works. The service I mentioned earlier, BCG Premier, will soon help attorneys apply directly to those firms. Law firms have different personality types they look for, and you never know which firm might be a good fit for you.
Years ago, there was an organization I wanted to join called TED. They had something like TED Lite, which is still around. TED Lite wasn't that difficult to get into—it was challenging, but not nearly as difficult as the real TED, where all the big things happen.
I remember talking to someone in charge of membership there, and I told them, "You know, I applied, and I think I can get in." At the time, I had my recruiting business and other larger ventures. But she said, "They only let in people they know. You can’t just apply; you need to network, get to know people, and that's how it works." Once people know who you are, your chances of getting a position improve significantly.
I knew an attorney who worked at Quinn Emanuel. After law school, the only position he could get was in insurance defense, which isn’t the most complex type of litigation. However, during a trial, he faced off against a Quinn Emanuel attorney. They got to know each other, went out to lunch, and the partner learned more about his story, which humanized him. As a result, he was able to get hired by Quinn Emanuel—something that would have been impossible by just sending an application.
The more you can humanize yourself and find places where others aren’t applying, the better off you'll be. Now, the next point is very important, and many people miss it: you often apply too late for a job.
Here’s how that works: you should be monitoring every job site you can, daily. The reason is that when recruiting partners or HR personnel post a job, they start receiving applications right away. Since they have a business need to hire someone quickly—because they’re losing money with work not being done—they receive 20 or 30 applications in the first couple of days. Then, they try to pick the best two or three candidates from those initial applications and start the interview process. Once they're interviewing people, they don't pay much attention to later applicants because they’ve already bonded with the first few candidates. Additionally, it’s a lot of administrative work to keep reviewing new resumes.
Who wants to open 20 or 30 new emails each day, review resumes, and keep up with that? Most people don't. If you apply early, meaning you're one of the first applicants, your chances of getting noticed increase significantly.
Another thing to know is that when jobs are posted on sites like LinkedIn, Indeed, or LawCrossing, they may stay up for 30 or 60 days. Often, by the time you apply, the job is already outdated, and interviews have already taken place. That’s why it’s crucial to apply as soon as a job is posted. Even if you're the most qualified candidate, if you don’t apply on the day or the day after the job becomes available, your chances of getting the position drop dramatically.
At BCG, when candidates come in, we send them active job openings right away. But even then, the law firms may already be interviewing candidates, making it harder for our candidates to get those jobs. It’s only after several weeks of applying to fresh openings that candidates start getting interviews because we’re getting them out to firms immediately.
By the time law firms are interviewing candidates, they’ve already started bonding with them and don’t want to go through the hassle of considering new applicants. They want to make a decision based on the first few resumes they’ve reviewed. So, you shouldn’t feel bad if you apply to 50 firms today and don’t get interviews. The reason is likely that the job already has applicants being interviewed, and the firm doesn’t want to spend extra time and money on more candidates.
Think about it: law firms have to pay someone to review resumes, contact candidates, and conduct interviews, which takes away time that could be spent billing clients or working on cases. So, it’s a big investment for them, and they don’t want to waste extra time. That’s why, even if you're the best applicant, it’s important to apply early.
At BCG, we work seven days a week, using technology and a large team to get job openings for our candidates as quickly as possible. Then, we help them apply immediately. LawCrossing is a great way to find jobs quickly, as it posts jobs the second they become available. A good recruiter will send you the information about these jobs and help you follow up. But this is something you can do yourself, too. You just have to monitor the market daily and apply to new openings right away.
You cannot afford to delay. Apply immediately—it’s incredibly important. This isn't casual; you can’t see an opening and think, "Maybe I'll apply in a few days." You have to act right away because, if you don’t, you often won’t get the job. You need to be proactive and intense in your job search. If there are law firms you’re interested in, monitor their job postings closely and apply as soon as you see an opening.
Another important factor is your law school. Many law firms hire only from law schools with a certain ranking, and they will do this regardless of how senior you are. These firms pride themselves on hiring from top law schools, and there's nothing you can do to change that. But you shouldn’t feel bad about it. Ultimately, the law school you attended doesn’t define your career.
Often, some of the most successful attorneys attended lower-ranked law schools. I see it all the time in personal injury law, where people who weren’t top students at elite schools now own their own planes. It’s crazy, but it happens. You have to make the most of what you have, and someone will hire you. And if not, you can always start your own firm, which I’ve seen people do very successfully.
Sometimes, your law school ranking matters when you're a junior attorney, especially if you're applying to firms in the same city as your law school. But over time, your ranking becomes less important. If you’re a first-year attorney in Detroit and went to Wayne State University Law School, firms in Detroit may look at your ranking within your law school because that’s one way to compare you to other candidates.
However, you can’t change the law school you went to or the grades you earned. Law firms that hire based on law school prestige do so because it looks good to their clients. But the reality is that people go to different law schools for different reasons—scholarships, proximity to home, or standardized test performance.
Some law firms believe that attorneys from prestigious law schools are smarter because they did well on standardized tests, got good college grades, and excelled in law school. There may be some truth to that, but it doesn’t always matter. Being a good lawyer often means solving problems, and that's not always about intelligence. You should focus on practice areas where your skills and experience matter more than where you went to school.
The best way to succeed is to specialize in a practice area and show commitment. Law firms will hire people with focus and expertise, regardless of their law school. Some of the best attorneys in fields like ERISA or patent prosecution come from lower-ranked schools but succeed because of their focus and experience.
In short, the law school you attended matters less as you gain experience, and many attorneys from less prestigious schools excel in their careers. It’s all about how you present yourself and your expertise.
My advice to you, if you didn’t go to a top law school, is to really focus your resume. For example, if you’re listing your experience at a firm, let’s say you’ve done a little corporate work, some trademark work, and a lot of commercial litigation—take your resume and make it look like you’re an outstanding commercial litigator. Highlight that experience and remove the irrelevant details about other areas that don’t relate to your focus.
For people from less prestigious law schools, having a clear focus on a practice area makes you much more hireable.
I can’t stress enough how important this is. So, what does this mean? If you come from a lower-ranked law school and you focus on a practice area, very few people maintain that focus. Their resumes often lack it, which is a huge mistake. You should avoid putting a variety of unrelated experiences on your resume.
Some people list all the things they did in law school, like being in four different clubs—maybe entertainment law, corporate law, and others. While you may be proud of those activities, if they don’t relate to your current practice area, they don’t belong on your resume. The same goes for past law firm experiences that don’t align with your current focus.
For example, if you’re currently doing corporate work and have been for the past three years, but your previous two firms were in litigation, don’t mention the litigation experience. Simply list that you were an associate at those firms without going into unnecessary detail. Don’t brag about things that aren’t relevant to your current role—it’s counterproductive.
If you focus on a particular practice area in your job search, that’s what law firms are looking for. Let’s say a law firm is looking for a tax attorney with trust and estates experience. The best thing a candidate can do is make their resume all about that focus. I recently saw someone get hired for a job paying $220,000 at a prestigious firm, up from $110,000 at an accounting firm, simply because they focused their resume on trust and estates experience. They didn’t include unrelated experiences that would have diluted their profile.
When you have that level of focus, you should apply to as many places as you can, even if there’s no posted opening. I can’t emphasize enough how critical it is to take your resume and make it look like you do nothing but one practice area. If you’ve worked in other areas, simply mention that you were an associate at those firms without detailing unrelated experiences. Don’t include information about jobs before law school unless they are relevant to what you’re doing now.
You want your resume to reflect a clear focus on your current practice area. Many people don’t realize this, but sometimes you won’t get hired because you went to a law school that’s “too good.” If a law firm is filled with people from middle-ranked or lower-ranked law schools, they may not interview you because they think you’ll expect a higher salary or better work, or that you’ll feel superior to the other attorneys. This happens more often than you’d think.
When people from top law schools are hired at smaller firms during a slow job market, the firm may assume that the new hire will leave once the market picks up. They may also worry that hiring someone with such credentials could undermine the morale of other attorneys. Firms don’t like that.
If you went to a top law school, it can be difficult to get firms that are less prestigious or less selective to consider you, even if the job market is slow. They often assume you won’t stay long-term or that you won’t fit in.
I had an interesting experience with my father when I was in high school. I was doing well—playing sports, vice president of the student council, getting good grades. At the time, I had just finished dating the homecoming queen, but I met a girl who was very different. She had dropped out of high school at 15 and had a tough life. My father told me, “This isn’t going to work because she’s not going to be comfortable with you and everything you’re doing.”
What he meant was that when you’re talented or have certain advantages, people who aren’t comfortable with that background may not be interested in you. This happens in law firms, too. People with excellent qualifications may not fit well in smaller firms, and it can lead to complications.
Similarly, when people from prestigious law schools apply to firms that aren’t as prestigious, the fit may not be right. The firm may assume you’ll expect better treatment or won’t work as hard because of your background. Law firms are businesses, and they want people who fit in and are committed to the work, regardless of their academic pedigree.
I remember when I started clerking for a judge after law school. He didn’t go to as prestigious a law school as I did, nor did my co-clerk. I felt like I was better than them, like I was going to work at big firms and they weren’t. That’s not a good attitude to have, and it’s something that law firms pick up on. If you come across as entitled or expecting special treatment, it can hurt you.
When I started at Quinn Emanuel, there was a woman who had gone to Yale Law School. At the time, Quinn Emanuel was small—around 45 attorneys. She demanded to be made a partner in three years, which was a big deal. Law firms don’t always respond well to that level of entitlement.
Many people from prestigious law schools think they deserve the best work without having to put in the same level of effort. This mindset can lead to early career trouble. You have to prove yourself, regardless of your background.
Law firms want people who are committed to staying long-term. The highest-paying firms want you to start as a summer associate and work hard for 8 to 12 years with the goal of making partner. If you move around too much, it can signal to a firm that you’re not committed. They may think you’re likely to leave again, and that’s not worth the investment for them.
Frequent job hopping makes it harder for firms to invest in you. Each time someone leaves, it disrupts the workflow, costs money, and affects morale. If you seem predisposed to leave, it becomes a red flag.
If you’ve moved around a lot, firms may assume that you either weren’t a good fit or were asked to leave. If your work isn’t strong, firms will find out, and that’s why staying at a firm and building a stable career history is essential.
At the end of the day, law firms want people who will fit in, stay committed, and work hard for the long haul. You have to be careful about how your career moves look on your resume and focus on showing stability and commitment.
I was at a business networking group recently, and a guy there was talking about how he believes he's just a bad person. He said he gets involved with women, makes them feel like they’re the only person he's interested in, flatters them, and is nice to them, but he just can’t stop having other women on the side. He just can’t stop it.
That’s who he is. He certainly doesn’t portray himself that way to women, but that’s his reality. He’s someone who is always going to cheat, and some people are like that. Some people have certain qualities where they’re always going to leave the firm they’re at, no matter where they go, and that’s just who they are. They’ll always leave and won’t stay.
For law firms, they want stability. You would want stability too if you were hiring someone. If you move around a lot, you need to realize that every move you make won’t look good, and law firms won’t be interested in you.
I remember when I was at my first law firm, Quinn Emanuel. I used to get calls from recruiters weekly. I don’t know if it was every other day, but at least once a week, I would get a call from a recruiter. They just kept calling and calling, and that was the only firm I had ever been at. Then, I moved to my second firm, and I was there for over a year, but I didn’t receive a single call from a recruiter.
The reason I didn’t receive a call is because they didn’t want someone who had been at their first firm for just a year and at the next firm for only a year. They knew that this wasn’t a good candidate to call because it would be difficult to place someone who had only stayed at each firm for a year, so the calls stopped. It’s too much trouble for law firms to hire people who are likely to leave.
A good recruiter—and this is something you can do yourself—can frame you as someone who may not have found the perfect home yet. What does that mean? That means you might say you're interested in working for large public companies as a corporate attorney. Maybe you started out at a firm working for mom-and-pop businesses, then moved to a mid-size firm working for slightly larger companies, and with each move, you can say, "I wanted to work for bigger companies and handle more sophisticated transactions." Attorneys can do this in any practice area.
You can say, "I’m moving because I want to get more focused," or, "I want to advance in a certain way," and frame each move like that. This can help you a lot. Or you might say you want to work with people who share a certain background or interest, or you want to be in a firm that aligns with your values. If there are valid reasons for each move, it can work in your favor.
The most important thing is to show that each move was about progressing in your career. If your resume shows focus and you can explain your moves as logical steps towards a goal, that can be very beneficial. For example, you might start at a smaller firm and then move to a larger firm with more sophisticated clients. People appreciate candidates who are improving their skills and advancing.
Or you might move from a large firm to a smaller firm because you want more opportunities to develop clients, and if that doesn’t work out, you could move again for a better fit. You can frame your moves this way, showing that you are growing with each transition. Sometimes law firms have financial problems, or they collapse, and that could explain a move. Another common reason is relocating to a new geographic area.
One of the easiest moves to explain is a relocation for personal reasons. For instance, if you want to move closer to your parents, spouse, or family, law firms will believe that being near family will make you more stable. Even if you’ve had two moves in three years, a move back home for family reasons can make sense to a law firm, and they’ll see it as a positive.
There’s a whole strategy to this. Most of the time when you move, you need to look like you're doing it to advance your career. You need to appear special and goal-oriented. It’s important that your current employers understand that your reasons for moving are related to your career goals, and that the new law firm will help you achieve those goals.
This is common, especially for attorneys moving to smaller, boutique firms where they can gain more responsibility. There are plenty of reasons you can give to explain your moves. Each move needs to appear as though it’s bringing you closer to your professional objectives. For example, if you want to do entertainment law and you're only getting a little bit of that work at your current firm, you could move to a firm where you’ll get more entertainment law work. If that doesn’t pan out, you could move to a firm that specializes entirely in entertainment law. These kinds of moves are logical, explainable, and seen as positive.
Another factor, which I’ve mentioned before, is your grades. For some top firms, like Gibson Dunn, even if you have significant achievements, they will still look at your law school grades to assess your qualifications. Some firms will only hire candidates from certain ranking thresholds. For example, at firms like Latham & Watkins, they may have grade cutoffs for each law school. Even if you attended a lower-ranked law school, being first or second in your class can make you stand out.
One of the biggest mistakes people make is putting unnecessary or less impressive information about their grades on their resume. Some people list things like, "Top 40% of my class," or, "I got an A in these three courses," which can make it obvious that they didn’t get A’s in the others. You should never put something on your resume that doesn’t reflect very well on you.
If you're not at the top of your class, leave your grades off your resume. Why would you highlight something that doesn't help you? However, if you're in the top 10% or have received an award for your academic performance, you can mention that. But don’t put mediocre grades on your resume—they don’t add value and can hurt your chances.
People will sometimes put that they have a 2.5 GPA or a 3.2 GPA on their resume, and I’ve seen applicants write that the top half of the class has a 3.25 GPA. This doesn’t make sense and doesn’t help your case. You should never highlight anything that’s not stellar.
As an attorney representing a client, you wouldn’t draw attention to mediocrity or anything less than strong arguments. Law firms want to feel like they’re hiring the best people, even if that’s not entirely true. I’ve seen law firms pass over candidates who draw attention to the wrong things.
I saw one woman who went to the University of Minnesota Law School. I've mentioned this example before in webinars. When she attended the University of Minnesota, her performance was terrible—she literally had C's and D's.
She somehow managed to get a job with a federal appellate judge, a very well-known one. I have no idea how she got it. The judge obviously didn’t check her grades, and she secured the clerkship. Then, when her clerkship was ending, we represented her and got her a job at one of the top five firms in Silicon Valley, and they never reviewed her grades. They just didn’t check, and they hired her.
Of course, once she was at the firm, her performance wasn’t up to par. After a year, they asked her to leave. Then she got a job at one of the top 10 or 15 best law firms doing litigation in Los Angeles, and again, they didn’t check her grades. If she had drawn any attention to her poor academic performance, she would never have been hired. Her career wouldn’t have taken off the way it did, and she wouldn’t have made as much money or been able to stay in large law firms for as long as she did.
You never want to emphasize things that don’t make you look strong. If you have poor grades, you need to focus on making yourself look really good in your practice area if a law firm asks for those grades. Now, grades, as I’ve mentioned before, are really only important for junior attorneys. That’s because, for junior attorneys, it’s the only metric law firms have to evaluate them.
However, once you become more senior and have been working in a specific practice area for several years, it’s very rare for law firms to ask for your grades. At that point, you just need to demonstrate that you’re strong in your practice area, driven, and that a recruiter can provide a glowing write-up about you. The recruiter’s job is to get the firm to look at you without focusing on your grades. Once the interview process begins, the law firm won’t focus much on grades. They will evaluate how well you interview and whether you fit the firm’s culture.
Many law firms will interview you without asking for your grades. In fact, for about 80% of the people we represent with more than three or four years of experience, grades never come up. Larger, more established law firms typically have systems in place to screen candidates based on grades, especially if they’ve been around for 50 years or more. These firms have well-defined procedures for screening applicants. However, newer firms often don’t have these systems in place, so if you have bad grades, you can apply to newer firms, and they may not even think to ask about them. This can be a great strategy.
On the other hand, the older, more established, and more profitable a firm is, the more likely they are to thoroughly vet you, including your grades. These firms may "bust you" or push you aside if they uncover poor academic performance.
Here’s another big point that people often overlook. Many attorneys, especially now with the rise of social media and the ability to sell things online, are proud of their entrepreneurial skills. They proudly list businesses they’ve started on their resumes. The problem with this is that if you look entrepreneurial, law firms will wonder why you would stay at the firm and work for a set salary when you might think you could do better on your own.
This is exactly what happened to me. When I was younger, in high school, college, and even during law school, I ran an asphalt business in Michigan several weeks a year. After graduating from law school and working for a judge, I realized I could make more money and have control over my time by running my own business. I could control how much I earned and have more freedom. Later, when I learned about legal recruiters, I thought, "I can do this myself—I don’t need to work in a law firm when I could do much better with my own business." And that’s exactly what I did.
Law firms don’t necessarily like entrepreneurs. Being entrepreneurial can be valuable when you’re close to becoming a partner and need to bring in clients, but most attorneys—particularly associates—are expected to sit at their desks, meet with clients, and work. Whether you’re an associate or a partner, the expectation is that you’re a reliable, steady worker.
If you come across as someone who’s always chasing the next business opportunity or thinking about starting your own venture, law firms won’t like that. I see resumes all the time from people who left law firms to start their own businesses or worked at startups that didn’t succeed. Later, they struggle to find jobs because law firms know they’ll likely leave again to pursue their next idea.
I’m currently working with a guy who started his career at Skadden. After five years there, he left to start his own business, which didn’t work out after a year and a half. Despite having great qualifications—he went to a top 20 law school and did really well academically—no one will hire him now. You don’t want to look too entrepreneurial on your resume. You need to downplay those ventures because if you’re seen as someone who’s always thinking about starting a business, law firms will assume you’ll leave.
At every law firm I’ve worked at, I’ve seen certain personalities that are just entrepreneurial by nature. It’s in their blood. Entrepreneurs often bounce from business to business, and for some, law is just one way to support themselves while starting other businesses. These people are always thinking about how to make more money and often consider starting their own law firm.
Entrepreneurial attorneys will sometimes build strong relationships with clients, making it seem like they’re the only ones who can help, rather than the law firm or its partners. Eventually, they’ll try to take those clients and start their own firm. This happens all the time, both at large and small law firms, and it’s something law firms need to be cautious about.
As an attorney, your job is to serve clients, particularly corporations or entrepreneurs who have their own businesses. That’s your role. But attorneys with entrepreneurial tendencies often think, "I could run this business myself," or, "I want to start a business with this person." These attorneys often spend their time thinking about how they can be more successful in business rather than focusing on solving clients' problems.
To succeed in a law firm, you need to have a personality that’s focused on helping others—clients who are successful in business—rather than trying to become successful in business yourself. You need to be a protector of others, not someone chasing the next big thing for yourself.
You know, entrepreneurs are just a different type of people, and you may be entrepreneurial. A significant portion of the population is entrepreneurial. If you think that way and it shows on your resume, it's not going to help you. When I had my asphalt business and was applying to law firms, I included all this information because I was so proud of my entrepreneurial endeavors, but law firms weren’t interested in that—until I took it off my resume.
You need to be doing a job that you enjoy, and if you're entrepreneurial and have an idea for a business, you should go all in. But you need to be very confident. I was confident when I got into recruiting, and you need to be just as confident that you're going to succeed. You shouldn’t take risks just for the sake of taking risks.
It’s very common for attorneys at large law firms to decide that a friend or someone they know is starting a business, and they might get involved, especially if the business is getting venture funding. But almost always, those businesses fail. If you're going to take that risk, you need to be very calculated and very sure that you want to leave the legal profession. Ultimately, if you're entrepreneurial, I would make this point: you can still be entrepreneurial once you become a partner, bringing in clients and essentially running your own little business.
The law firm will pay you a percentage of the business you generate, the work they bill, and support you, so in a sense, you’re running a small franchise. Being a partner is entrepreneurial. But one thing I want to point out is this: if you start your own business, remember, like I did when I started mine, that many of my friends were very successful lawyers. If your business does $2 million in revenue a year, that’s a good business. But if the profit margins are only 10%, that’s just $200,000. Can you maintain profit margins at that level? That’s the key question.
From a business standpoint, think about how much revenue a business needs to generate for you to profit at the same level as what you're making now in a law firm. Working in a law firm is actually very lucrative compared to many other ventures. It's important to keep that in mind.
Another issue with starting your own business is that if it doesn’t work, the law firm you return to will know you didn’t have what it took to make the business succeed, and that failure won’t reflect well on you. No one wants to look like they’ve failed. Law firms will also know that if you’ve started a business before, you have entrepreneurial tendencies, and they’ll suspect you’re likely to leave again.
Almost every attorney I’ve known who returned to a law firm after starting their own business still thought about how to start another one. They may be back in a law firm, but in the back of their mind, they’re thinking about what they need to do to start another business. I know I did. When I was at a law firm, I was always ordering books and courses—back then, nothing was online—on how to start a tax resolution practice or how to become a trust and estate attorney. I was constantly thinking about doing something else.
If I had moved to another firm, I would have been doing the same thing—thinking about how to start a business. That’s why I recommend, and I hate to say this, but if you’ve had a lot of entrepreneurial activity in the past—whether it’s running a lawn care business or selling knickknacks on eBay—you need to be careful about how that’s portrayed. Running small ventures like that doesn’t really qualify as a business. But if you’ve had a legitimate business, you need to ensure that the law firm sees you as someone who is going to stay with them. This is very important.
I remember when I started my first law firm job. I had sold my asphalt business before I moved to Los Angeles, and at the time, I thought I had made a lot of money. I was able to put a down payment on a house while other associates were just starting their careers. No one else had a house, and I was very proud of what I had accomplished. I remember telling one of the high-end partners how much I had made from the business. I kind of felt superior, rubbing it in, like, "Look at what I’ve done." But that mindset wasn’t helpful because I was never really happy working for someone else.
Entrepreneurs often crave attention, and that’s not good. They feel superior to people who have just moved through traditional channels, like being bookworms. This sense of superiority and independence doesn’t sit well in law firms. Being too independent isn’t a good thing.
So, you need to tone down the entrepreneurial side of your resume. It should look like your main goal is to work at a law firm. You can mention that you had a business, but don’t go into detail about how great it was. Some resumes of people with businesses are filled with bragging and lengthy descriptions of how successful their ventures were. These resumes end up focusing more on the business than on their legal careers.
Your resume needs to be laser-focused on your practice area. This is a critical point, and it will get you far more interviews. If your resume suggests that you’re interested in other things besides your practice area, people will look at it and think, "This person is an entrepreneur," not, "This person is a litigation attorney." Everything on your resume should be geared toward your practice area. Take off anything that doesn’t relate to it. Your resume should make you look as focused as possible.
People looking at your resume want to think, "This person is a corporate attorney, and that’s all there is to it." They don’t want to see other practice areas or unrelated details about your business ventures. They just want to see why you’re excellent in your practice area.
A couple of years ago, I was working with someone—I don’t know if I ended up representing them—but this same issue came up.
A couple of years ago, I was talking to someone who had a resume that showed they were unemployed, but they had worked at a big firm before. After working at this big firm, they put together a resume, and it was the craziest thing. The person was a corporate attorney, yet they had about four or five sentences at the beginning of their resume talking about pro bono work they did.
It was four or five lines about pro bono work, and only one sentence mentioned the corporate work they had done. They weren’t getting interviews, and people were wondering, "What's going on?" They were asking, "Why would we hire someone who looks like they’re interested in something else?"
I had another situation that was very sad. When I say sad, I mean it really bothered me. I even hired this person to help with talking to new BCG candidates and preparing them for interviews. He had gone to Harvard Law School, which was incredible. I think he had won the Sears Prize or something, which is given to the top five students. It was an impressive achievement. He had gotten a job at a really good law firm out of law school and later moved to another firm, where he was doing appellate work.
But for some reason, about eight or nine years into his career, he was no longer employed. When I spoke to him, he was unable to successfully get a job and had been unemployed for some time. He came to me for help.
Now, don't take this negatively. I don’t want to reflect negatively on anyone, nor do I want to sound prejudiced against people of different backgrounds or sexual orientations. But when I looked at his resume, it focused heavily on the fact that he was gay. It mentioned how he had been a member of several gay associations in law school, as well as various gay rights groups outside of law firms. His resume talked about his involvement in gay rights and related activities around 27 times.
All someone would see when looking at his resume was that his focus wasn’t on his great legal experience or his education—it was on something else. It looked like he was interested in something other than litigation. I’m not saying that being gay or being part of those groups is bad. It could have been about pinball machines or anything else. The point is, if you have things on your resume that make it look like you’re more interested in something else, it’s not going to help you. This guy was a litigator, and his resume should have been all about litigation. That’s what it should have focused on—everything about litigation.
When someone looks at your resume, they shouldn’t be thinking about pinball machines, race, or sexual orientation. Those things are important, and you should be proud of them, but they don’t belong on your resume in a way that detracts from your professional focus. Your resume should be 100% focused on your practice area, the more you can. You want people to look at your resume and think, "This person is this type of attorney, doing this type of work." The better you do that, the better off you'll be.
The information I’m giving you now will save your career. You've been in this webinar for a while, and I can’t emphasize this enough—this will save your career because people don’t get jobs when they clutter their resumes with things that don’t relate to their practice area.
People put politics on their resumes, or they mention their racial background, sexual orientation, or outside interests like pinball machines. There’s nothing wrong with any of that, but the problem is when your resume makes people think that’s where your focus is. Your focus, and again, this is vital information, should be clear. People looking at your resume should just think, "This person is a tax attorney," or "This person is a corporate attorney." That’s it.
If you’ve had two jobs before your current job—maybe one was in trademark law and another in tax law—and now you’re doing litigation, you should not talk about your previous experience in other practice areas on your resume. That will only confuse potential employers. Leave those details out. Just say, "I was an associate at these firms," and that’s it. You want people to look at your resume and think, "This person is a tax attorney," or "This person is a corporate attorney." That’s all they need to see.
I’ve had situations where I’ve worked with two candidates from the same law school, in the same practice area, and in the same location, searching for jobs. I would send the resume of one candidate who only talked about their experience in their one practice area, and I would send the resume of the other candidate who included information about their political interests, race, or sexual orientation. Despite having similar grades, the person who focused solely on their practice area got interviews, while the person who mentioned unrelated information didn’t.
So think about that. Why would you include anything that detracts from your practice area?
Entrepreneurship and any experience unrelated to your legal practice will always hurt your chances. Another reason law firms may reject you is that your law firm experience might not be good enough for the firms you’re applying to. You need to have the right experience, or at least make it look like you want to do the specific type of job the firm is hiring for. You have to be focused.
For example, if someone is applying for a securities law position but lists five different types of corporate law, such as corporate generalist law or corporate M&A law, they will have a much harder time getting a job than someone who only lists securities law. You have to look as focused as possible on your resume. Most law firms hiring laterally, as I’ve mentioned many times in this webinar, only want to hire people who are doing the exact type of work they need.
That's it. Law firms don’t want to hire people who are doing other things that don’t align with their needs. I had an experience once where it was the worst choice I ever made. I had a saltwater aquarium, and I needed to have it serviced.
A guy came by, and he lived in a very nice neighborhood. I think he was renting a room there or something, but he felt like he was very important because of his past financial success. He wanted to clean my aquarium for me. In addition, he was doing other odd jobs for people, so I hired him. But he had all these different interests.
So, he came to clean my aquarium, and to get the algae out, he used a big aquarium tool. Instead of using a sponge or something appropriate, he used something with a razor blade. He wasn’t experienced in it, and he did something that was outside the scope of his work, which ended up damaging the aquarium. The same thing can happen with a recruiter—they can stray outside the scope of what’s important for your experience.
If you can, you need to make sure your experience always tracks with the practice area you're in. Don’t include unnecessary details about practice areas that aren’t relevant to the job you’re seeking. Good recruiters help you refine your focus and market you to law firms that are a good fit.
Now, to continue, we’re almost done, but this is a very important webinar. If you’re working outside a law firm, like going in-house or working for the government, it generally doesn't matter to law firms. There are exceptions, like judicial clerkships, but most law firms will not hire people who have gone in-house. This happens all the time.
I’ve had candidates from top five law schools who worked at great firms like Wilson Sonsini or Fenwick, but after deciding to go in-house, they struggled to return to law firms. Most law firms simply won’t be interested in hiring someone who left the law firm setting because they assume that person won’t stay if they return. Why would a law firm want to hire someone who already left the law firm environment once? If you leave a law firm and go do something else, your odds of getting hired back into a firm are very slim.
I was talking about an attorney earlier from a top five law school who went in-house after working at Fenwick and then wanted to return to a law firm. That person applied to 50 firms in Silicon Valley, and none of them were interested. Law firms want to hire people who have remained in the same practice setting. It’s just how it works. If you decide to move into another practice setting, you should be very careful because law firms are not likely to hire you back.
Law firms are very different from in-house environments. When you go in-house, you typically become more of a generalist, and the most sophisticated work is usually referred out to law firms. People in law firms are committed to that career path, and if you leave to do something else, you’re essentially throwing away your future in law firms.
I want to make a pitch here for law firms because that’s what I do—law firm placements. When you work in a law firm, you have the potential to do that work into your 70s or 80s. You will get clients, become an expert in your practice area, and always have work if you commit to it.
In-house jobs, on the other hand, typically don’t last long. They are very hard to get in the first place because companies prefer hiring people with recent law firm experience. Once you’re in-house, it becomes even harder to find another in-house job because you lose that recent law firm experience. Plus, in-house jobs are insecure. Companies change CEOs, general counsels, or even go out of business, and when that happens, legal departments are often overhauled or downsized. Legal departments are cost centers, not profit centers, so they’re often among the first to get cut during financial difficulties.
I had a candidate who got a great in-house job in Vail, Colorado, and bought a house there. But when he lost his job, he was stuck, wondering how he would pay his mortgage. These are the kinds of risks you take when you go in-house, and then, to make matters worse, law firms are reluctant to hire you back because they assume you still want to work in-house or that your experience isn’t relevant anymore.
If you go in-house, you can pretty much guarantee that you’ll lose your job at some point. It could be after one year, three years, or five years, but it’s likely to happen. When it does, you’ll have a very hard time finding a new job. In-house roles simply don’t provide the security that law firms offer.
Of course, some people prefer in-house work, and that’s fine. But if you choose that path, understand that it will impact your future. Law firms also like stability. If you’ve been at a midsize law firm for five years, they know that law firm and the quality of work it expects. Law firms can evaluate you based on that.
But if you’re coming from an in-house job, law firms won’t know what level of work was expected of you. Every company is different, and it’s hard for law firms to gauge the quality of your experience. In some practice areas, like real estate or patent law, it’s easier to transition back into law firms, but for the most part, once you go in-house, it’s very difficult to return to a law firm.
So what does a good recruiter do? A good recruiter will stress to the law firms that you’re hungry, that you are dissatisfied with your current work, and that you really want to go back. They’ll emphasize that you’ve learned your lesson, and they can present this convincingly. They will often try to make your experience look very focused in your practice area.
For example, you may be getting even better types of work that will help you when you return to law firm practice. Additionally, one of the things you can often do when you’re in-house is bring clients back, making you look like a strong candidate. I had an instance several years ago where I was working with a guy who had very good qualifications and had worked for General Motors in their legal department for about 15 or 20 years. He was well-connected and knew all the big firms in Detroit and some in Chicago. He knew the chairs of these firms and the most powerful partners who handled the most work—he was giving them work, after all.
When he lost his job due to an issue with seat belts and some matters that the legal department failed to handle, he was fired along with others. He thought that, because of his great experience and relationships with these big firms in Detroit and Chicago, they would be eager to hire him. But the reality was the exact opposite.
When he applied to those firms, it was just crickets—no one even responded. Despite years of giving them millions or tens of millions of dollars in work, they simply didn’t care. That’s how tough it is when you go in-house. So, if you’re in-house, you need to find firms that are still hiring, which often means going to smaller firms that can’t normally find people with your expertise in the market. That’s just how it works.
Now, the next point—and I apologize for this longer webinar, but these are very important points. This information is extremely important, and I appreciate everyone’s patience during this extended webinar.
Another very difficult situation is if you are currently unemployed. Being unemployed as an attorney makes it very challenging to find a new job. From a law firm’s perspective, they can hire someone who’s already employed. If someone is employed, it suggests they are doing good work and are therefore a better catch than someone who is unemployed. In markets like New York City, where there are so many candidates and options, if you’re unemployed and seeking a position in a large law firm, your odds of being hired are slim.
I wouldn’t say impossible, but next to impossible because law firms in big cities have so many options when it comes to hiring. Why would they hire you when they can hire someone who is employed? They have no incentive to do so, and they don’t. It’s crucial to understand that law firms are not impressed with unemployed candidates. They want to hire people who look like they are doing very well—people who are a real asset, someone they are wooing away from another position, rather than someone who is unemployed.
If you’re unemployed, it can suggest several things to law firms. One major concern is that you might have been fired because there was something wrong with your performance. Most attorneys who are unemployed didn’t leave their firms voluntarily—they were told to leave. And that only happens for specific reasons.
While it’s possible that the firm ran out of work, had financial problems, or decided to eliminate a particular practice area, the reality is that the best people are rarely let go. Even during layoffs, if a firm needs to downsize its corporate department and lay off 15 people out of 20, five people will still remain. If you were one of those let go, it indicates that you weren’t considered one of the top performers. Unfortunately, that’s how law firms view it.
Another significant reason law firms fire people is low billable hours. If you aren’t billing enough hours, it often suggests you’re not being given work, which can indicate a lack of ability. The best attorneys are always given a lot of work. You need to be in a position where you’re consistently getting enough work. In a law firm, your job is to get as much work as possible and to ensure that the flow of work never slows down.
So you need to be the best in your practice area. You need to be the most aggressive in seeking out work and getting work. It's hugely important. I had an attorney, another guy who was unemployed, in New York.
He lost his job because his firm required everyone to be ready to respond to an email at some point during the day on Mondays from a person in Boston who was assigning work. He just didn’t respond quickly enough, and as a result, he never had enough work and got fired. Even though he went to Columbia Law School or some other prestigious school and was working at a big firm, no one in New York would hire him. Often, attorneys will quit their jobs, saying they don’t like the management or have issues with the firm.
Sometimes these firms are 100+ years old. How do you justify disliking a firm that's been around for a century and will likely be around for another 100 years? It’s not a good explanation. So, if you quit a job, law firms will view it negatively, and that’s not good. If you feel like you need to quit your job because it's too stressful, or you don’t like the people, or you’re not getting along, you should find another job as quickly as possible before leaving.
There are situations in law firms where you might lose your job over something you didn’t think was wrong but was. You could make an offhand remark, get too drunk at an event, or upset a partner, and suddenly you lose all your political capital with the firm, and they let you go. So, you need to be very careful.
You need to have good relationships, get along with everyone, and avoid taking sides in political issues. Don’t be part of an associate group that doesn’t like the firm. You need to be seen as someone who is dedicated to the firm, supportive, and looks good in the eyes of others. Otherwise, you could get into trouble. So, you should never quit a job.
The role of an attorney in a law firm, and this is something you should write down—it’s extremely important, and I hope you write it down—is that your job as an attorney is to always have access to work. You always need access to work, and it should never stop. That means having access to work at your current firm until you find another firm.
It means doing good work because you want to have access to work. It means impressing the right partners because you want access to work. It means avoiding politics because you want access to work. It means having a good resume that doesn’t take people in the wrong direction because you want access to work. The job of a partner is to bring in business and have access to work.
So, as an associate, your entire job is to have access to work. The more work you get and the more hours you bill, the more you demonstrate your access to work, and law firms value that. Access to work is the number one responsibility of a law firm attorney, regardless of the situation. You must always be working. An attorney’s resume should have no gaps; you always need to be working.
And I’m sorry to say this. People think, "Oh, I’ll take a few years off," or "I need some time for personal reflection." No. Doing those things will hurt you. You need to have access to work. Please write this down—it’s the most important thing. You lose access to work when you take sides in office politics.
You lose access to work when you make your resume about something other than your practice area. You lose access to work when you get senior and aren’t working on developing a book of business. You always need to have access to work. I can’t stress this enough. You don’t want to be unemployed.
If you are unemployed, you want to get a job quickly. An attorney should always be working. And by working, I mean actively doing legal work and seeking out more. That’s one reason I don’t like going in-house—because when you go in-house, you can’t control factors like the company going out of business, having financial problems, a new general counsel or CEO coming in, or other unpredictable circumstances.
In-house jobs don't guarantee access to work. You need access to work, and you can’t control those external factors in-house. Please remember this: anything that detracts from your access to work—getting involved with the wrong people, making mistakes with people—will hurt you. Your ability to have access to work is huge.
If you quit your job and have reasons for it, regardless of your logic, people aren’t going to want to hire you. It just happens. Another interesting thing that occurs is, in my career, I’ve hired people as recruiters who had lost their previous jobs or had been fired.
What happens is quite interesting and has happened consistently with many people. People who were fired and are angry about it often come to work for me, and then they end up being mad at me, quitting the job, or causing issues like starting rumors within the firm. So, if you’ve been fired from a job, the odds are pretty good that you might quit the next one as well, and when you go to the next firm, you may still be angry and end up quitting again. That’s why law firms view candidates who have been fired with caution.
If you are fired, there are often reasons beyond your control. Sometimes a law firm may settle a couple of big litigation cases, leaving them without enough work, and they have no choice but to let people go. Other times, law firms may lose clients or the market for your practice area may dry up, like what sometimes happens with corporate attorneys. In those cases, it’s possible to explain the situation.
People also leave for significant family crises, such as a sick child, a sick parent, or even personal illness. Law firms are often understanding if you need to take time off for childbirth or similar reasons, but for other situations, you need to be very careful about how you explain things. If your departure is perceived to be related to your performance, it’s going to hurt you. So, you need to be very careful.
You don’t want gaps in your resume; you always want access to work. Do whatever you can to maintain access to work. If you’re fired from your job, you need to negotiate how long you will remain on the firm’s website. You should push for at least three months, even if they only offer two, and explain your unhappiness with the situation. You need to make it look like you were working continuously to maintain access to work.
It’s also important to understand why you’re getting a new job at a firm. Ask questions like, “How long did the previous person stay here?” and “What’s going on at this firm?” Often, firms aren’t stable and don’t keep people around, so you need to be careful.
Another thing to avoid is drawing too much attention to things that aren’t relevant to the practice of law. Many people include too much political information on their resumes. If you’re deeply involved in Republican politics, for example, why put that on your resume when half the law firms may not be Republican? If you’re applying in San Francisco, likely none of them are. You just shouldn’t include that information.
I had an instance after September 11th when I worked with a candidate who had a lot of information on his resume about being Muslim, which is perfectly fine. He had an Arabic last name and was applying to firms in New York. Candidates with similar qualifications who didn’t include such information were getting interviews, but he wasn’t. It’s not about prejudice; it’s about drawing attention to something that detracts from your professional qualifications. I’m not criticizing someone for being Muslim, but it just wasn’t working in that moment in history.
Sometimes law firms may be all men, all women, all African Americans, or all Democrats or Republicans. You can’t control that, but you need to be careful about what you list on your resume.
I worked with a woman from Stanford Law School who had great grades, but she had only been able to land one job after graduating, despite being from such a top school. She had included a lot of personal information on her resume about being raped and her involvement in a leading organization for rape victims. While that may have helped her get into Stanford, it became the only thing that stood out on her resume. It made people uncomfortable. There’s nothing wrong with being involved in such causes, but she refused to take it off her resume, and as a result, she wasn’t getting interviews.
Similarly, I once had a client who included 27 references to his sexual orientation on his resume. Again, nothing wrong with that, but it detracted from his professional qualifications. You need to be very careful. Your resume needs to look neutral and be focused on what law firms want to see.
If you want to emphasize being a Democrat, for example, apply to firms where that’s common. But in general, you need to remove information from your resume that doesn’t pertain to your practice area or qualifications.
Some candidates are much older, whether they’re senior associates or more seasoned attorneys. Unfortunately, most law firms prefer to hire younger people.
There's a perception that younger attorneys are going to work harder. There's also a perception that they are more likely to follow directions and show deference to partners. A partner doesn't want to have to order someone in their fifties or sixties to work 1,000 hours a year. They just don’t, and they know you won’t. You may also become disillusioned with working in law firms.
If you have these factors working against you, law firms are often going to avoid hiring you. They will recognize that, and I hate to say this, but people who are older may not be as committed. They may even become resentful of younger partners telling them what to do. Sometimes people go to law school in their forties, and law firms hire them as first-year attorneys. However, law firms are businesses, and they want to hire people who are most likely to work hard.
Unfortunately, if you become a senior associate and you don't have business, or you’re in your forties or fifties trying to work in a law firm, all of these factors will make it very difficult for you. A good recruiter will stress that you have a lot of energy and emphasize your profound and valuable experience in your practice area. This is something you need to do: make yourself look highly qualified and excellent in whatever you're doing, and that will help you get a job.
Here are a few important points: you are most marketable when you have 1 to 6 years of experience. Beyond that, you need to bring in business. You need to understand how to be focused during interviews with law firms. If you're not getting interviews, it’s because of one of these top ten reasons.
The final point is this: if you clean up your resume and background, I cannot emphasize this enough—you will always get a job if you apply to enough places. Everybody does. You cannot get discouraged. Apply to as many places as you possibly can, whether there are openings or not. Make sure that you are very focused.
Now, I’ll take a quick break. This was a longer presentation, but it was very important. During this break, if you think of any questions you have, please feel free to ask them. Everything is confidential. I'm not going to share your name.
The more questions you have about this or your career, the better. This is a very good opportunity to ask them. I charge a lot of money for private coaching, and you can get the same benefit without spending $1,000 for answers to a few questions—just by being here. That’s one of the big benefits of this webinar. You can ask me anything about your situation, your career goals, or things that you think may be holding you back. Just ask away, because your questions will help other people as well. The goal here is to help each other and become much more successful as attorneys.
We’ll take just a couple of minutes for a break, and then I’ll be back with your questions. Thank you. Alright, let's do this. I'm excited for all your questions.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Just give me one second here, and I will stop sharing and pull up the questions. Hey, great job to everyone. I noticed that, you know, I just started this webinar, and almost everyone who started is still here.
So you're definitely not losing thousands of people; you've only lost a few hundred. So that's good. Obviously, I think this information is being very well received, which I’m very happy about. So, sorry, just pulling up the questions here. But yeah, great job, everyone, for staying in this webinar because it’s a lot of information, but it’s extremely important for your career. I’m going to start with some of the most important and recent questions, and then I'll move on to some of the earlier ones too.
Is there anywhere that we can go to see statistics about hiring in specific fields of law in general? For example, I heard statistics that there are 20% more pharmacy graduates than there are pharmacy jobs available. Is there a place where we can look to see the numbers for things like this?
The most important thing to be aware of is that certain practice areas are always going to be marketable. For example, litigation is always marketable because most firms do litigation. So that's important to understand. Most firms do litigation. If you’re interested in litigation, for example, you can always find a firm that does that.
When you get into very specialized practice areas, like pharmacy law or patent law specializing in drugs, you would be very marketable if you could find a firm that does that kind of work. The more specialized your practice area, often the easier it is to get a job. For example, if you're an ERISA attorney, it’s often much easier to find a job than in other practice areas because there aren’t as many ERISA attorneys, but there will also be fewer jobs. So the more specialized your practice area, the better off you’re going to be, but there will be fewer opportunities.
I had an interesting situation years ago with a very senior attorney in his sixties who had been doing one type of patent prosecution involving optics. There were very few people in the country working on optic patents. I found him a firm in Texas that did exactly that. Even though there was no opening, they were so impressed by his specialized experience that they hired him.
So, the more specialized you are in a practice area, the better off you’ll be, but there will be fewer jobs available. On the other hand, if you're in a practice area like litigation, there are always plenty of people doing litigation, but you may need to apply to many places.
Another good practice area right now is trusts and estates. If you’re thinking about starting a business, or if you're a junior attorney coming out of law school, or even thinking about a practice area switch, trusts and estates is huge. There is so much interest in it right now. Almost every trusts and estates attorney is getting interviews. Understanding practice area trends and making decisions about your career based on that is important.
However, when choosing a practice area, you should select one where you're likely to stay and that you enjoy. Switching practice areas is not easy, although it is possible. I did an interview with Law360 recently, and they wrote about this topic. But in general, you want to choose a practice area where you feel committed and interested in the work.
Two big pointers for choosing a practice area:
There are two types of practice areas: transactional (such as real estate, corporate law, etc.) and non-transactional (such as litigation, employment law, etc.).
- Transactional practice areas: This involves documenting transactions, such as buying and selling. People who like math, science, or economics tend to do well in transactional areas.
- Non-transactional practice areas: This involves writing, conflict resolution, and understanding people. If you majored in English, psychology, or related fields, you may find non-transactional areas like litigation more suitable.
Choose the practice area that best fits your interests. People who enjoy transactional work tend to be less interested in working with people directly, while non-transactional practice areas tend to attract those who like writing, research, and dealing with people.
Choosing the right practice area can change the entire course of your career. I remember when I was a summer associate with a big firm, Reed & Grease (which merged with another firm and eventually went out of business). The firm asked what practice area I was interested in, and I said litigation or tax. The firm was a corporate firm, and they kept asking me, "Are you sure you don’t want to do corporate?" I ended up getting a soft offer to return after my judicial clerkship, but I think I would have received a hard offer had I said I wanted to do corporate law because that’s what they needed. You have to be very careful about the practice area you choose.
Again, these are great questions, and those people are asking very good questions. Thank you to everyone who's asking questions. I will answer as many as I can, considering time.
How can I differentiate myself from candidates who may have similar qualifications but are perceived as a higher flight risk? Are there particular indicators or red flags during the hiring process that I should be aware of and proactively address?
Flight risks typically show up if you're moving jobs frequently or moving to firms that aren't as good, and there’s a lot of movement on your resume. The big thing I stressed earlier about your resume and addressing potential flight risks is to ensure you don't have unrelated experience on your resume.
For example, I saw a woman who worked in an entertainment company before law school. During law school, she was part of entertainment societies, and when she got a job at a big New York firm, she kept saying, "I want to do entertainment." That’s a red flag. Anytime your resume suggests you might be interested in a different practice area, that’s a red flag.
A non-red flag, something that can help alleviate concerns, is strong references. If you're looking for a job and you’ve been at multiple firms but have excellent recommendations from your previous employers, you can list those references on your resume to show you may not be as much of a flight risk.
Make sure your resume looks like you're only interested in one thing—your current practice area. I mentioned earlier that entrepreneurial experience can also be a red flag, so be careful about how that’s portrayed. You need to look focused and committed to your firm.
Could you elaborate on specific aspects of law firm experience that are considered not good enough or inappropriate by top firms? I'm curious if this primarily relates to the size of the firm, the type of clients handled, or the complexity of cases. How can an attorney with such experience still position themselves effectively for competitive roles?
This is a very important point, and I’m glad you asked this question. The rule is: the larger the firm, the more specialized you need to look.
What does that mean? For example, if a firm is looking for an undercurrent liability attorney, you need to look like you specialize in that. The larger firms will hire someone who focuses on specific types of work because they can afford to pay for that kind of specialization. So if you’re a corporate generalist, and the firm wants a corporate M&A attorney, they’re going to find someone with a dedicated focus on M&A.
The larger the firm, the more specialized you’ll need to be. That’s why it’s difficult for generalists or people working in smaller firms to break into large firms—they don’t appear specialized enough.
For example, if someone is working in Madison, Wisconsin, and doing corporate work, they are probably doing generalist work because the market doesn’t demand the same level of specialization. But if you’re trying to work in big markets like New York, Houston, or Chicago, the firms expect you to be specialized.
How does this work in larger law firms?
Larger law firms have larger clients with bigger budgets, which allows attorneys to specialize and go into more depth on issues. If you’re at a smaller firm, your clients may not have the budget to allow you to spend as much time or go into as much detail on complex issues. This difference creates a disparity in experience. Attorneys at larger firms generally have more in-depth knowledge and can devote more resources to solving problems, which is why larger firms often outperform smaller ones.
If you're at a larger law firm, you will receive better training, become more specialized, and win more cases or deals because you have the resources to delve deeper into matters. This level of detail and specialization is something you don’t get at mid-sized or smaller firms because of their client constraints.
If an attorney has strong experience in one area of law but wants to switch to a different practice area, how should they approach law firm interviews to overcome the not good enough or not appropriate experience barrier? Are there specific ways to highlight their adaptability and potential to succeed in a new area?
Okay. So just think about it from the law firm's point of view. If a law firm wants to hire someone to serve a specific practice area and can attract people who are already in that practice area, why would they hire you if they can get someone with direct experience?
I was talking about this with a reporter recently, and I gave the example of an attorney who was first in their class from a top 25 law school, got a job at one of the top national firms in San Diego, and then decided to switch practice areas. He applied to over 100 firms and didn’t get a single interview because he wanted to switch from litigation to corporate, or from IP litigation to corporate. No one was interested, even though he was just a 1st-year associate.
So how do you make the switch?
The only way to do it—there are a couple of ways—you can network. I’ve seen people get privacy training and certifications. You can also network with people in the new practice area and try to gain more experience. But overall, it’s very, very hard. Typically, when you want to switch practice areas, you need to go to less prestigious firms or find positions in smaller markets where there are fewer attorneys.
In the case of the attorney I mentioned in San Diego, he kept lobbying his own firm to give him experience in the new practice area. They resisted at first, but eventually allowed him to switch. So, you can do it within your own firm by lobbying for work in the area you want to switch to. If you can get work in that area, you might eventually be able to transition.
But again, put yourself in the law firm’s position—why would they hire someone from another practice area when they can hire someone who already specializes in what they need?
Another problem with switching practice areas is the perception that you might not like the new area either. It’s common for attorneys at large law firms to be unhappy and think they’ll be happier in a different practice area, but it’s still a law firm with the same billable hour pressures. So, often people who switch practice areas aren’t any happier. That’s why the practice area you choose coming out of law school is very important.
Now, there are some practice area switches that are less difficult. For example, if you're in a transactional practice area like real estate or private equity, it’s often easier to move to another transactional area. But if you're in a non-transactional area like litigation, switching to another non-transactional area like commercial litigation or insurance defense can be easier.
Switching between practice areas within the same category (transactional to transactional or non-transactional to non-transactional) is usually much easier than switching from one category to another.
How do law firms perceive candidates who spend time in non-traditional legal roles versus in-house counsel or public interest? What steps can I take to make my non-law firm experience appealing to law firm recruiters?
These are all business decisions for law firms. If you were a law firm, would you prefer to hire someone who's been working in a law firm, or someone coming from an in-house position? You would likely choose the candidate from a law firm because they are more committed to the law firm environment. Someone who left for an in-house role may leave again.
It’s difficult for attorneys to transition back to law firms from in-house counsel or public interest work. For example, I encounter people from Yale Law School who did public interest work and now want to return to a law firm. The law firms aren’t interested because those candidates aren’t coming from a traditional law firm environment.
So how do you make yourself appealing to law firm recruiters?
You need to stress your expertise in a specific practice area. If you worked for a real estate company doing commercial purchases and sales, you need to market that experience to law firms. If you worked for an insurance company, market that to insurance defense firms. You need to present your in-house experience in a way that’s relevant to law firms.
The more non-traditional your background (in-house or public interest), the harder it is to get into a top law firm. But you can target smaller or mid-sized law firms, or firms in less competitive geographic locations, where they have a harder time finding candidates with your experience. You may not get into the best law firms, but you can find a job by positioning yourself as a strong candidate for the types of firms that need your expertise.
I once worked with a guy who had been in-house for 7 or 8 years after working at a big law firm. He used Latham & Watkins for his company’s legal work, and even though he didn’t fit the typical mold, Latham hired him based on his strong work ethic and focus in his practice area. His in-house experience made him a valuable hire because of his specific expertise and dedication.
So, the key is to stress your relevant experience in your practice area and focus your resume on what law firms are looking for.
If you can do that and target the right size firms, you’ll improve your chances of getting hired. Just remember, law firms want to see a focused, consistent commitment to the practice area you're applying for.
For law students who are struggling to secure interviews due to a lack of experience or because of the competitive nature of the market, what can they do to improve their chances? Are there specific types of extracurricular activities, certifications, or networking strategies that can bridge this gap and make them more appealing to potential employers?
Okay. So as a law student, your resume can do a couple of things. You can highlight something you did before law school—if you worked for a company, or in another field—and try to make it relevant to employers.
One of the things I've seen a lot is when people, for example, worked as a nurse (male or female) for several years before law school. Then, when they get into law school, they join the health law society, and that looks very appealing to law firms that need healthcare attorneys. Employers will love to hire someone like that. Or, if you worked for an investment bank before law school doing certain types of corporate transactions, that also looks very good.
But sometimes a law student won’t have anything relevant, like if they went straight from college to law school without any significant work experience. In that case, you need to think about what’s on your resume. You don’t want your resume to reflect interests outside of practicing law unless it shows extraordinary leadership or another valuable skill.
If you're a litigator, for example, focus on things related to litigation. Extracurriculars that aren’t relevant to your practice area aren’t going to help. Law students often include things on their resumes that have nothing to do with practicing law, and that can hurt them.
So, what can you do to improve your chances of getting interviews?
The key to getting interviews is simple—if you're not getting them, it's likely because of a lack of product-market fit. That means there are other candidates who may be a better fit for the job. However, getting interviews is not impossible.
Let me show you a few tricks that could help. Take a look at the cities in California, for example. There are thousands of cities with law firms across the state. Every single one of those cities has attorneys working in them. Here's a big city—Oakland—but even smaller cities like Oakley, California (population 43,000), have law firms with practicing attorneys.
So how does this help you?
If you're unemployed or struggling to get a job, you don’t need to limit yourself to big cities or popular firms. Every city in the state where you're admitted to practice has opportunities. For example, say you want to work in personal injury in Oakley, California. A simple search will show you pages of personal injury attorneys and firms in that area. If you want to work in corporate law, the same strategy applies.
All you need to do is reach out. Send an email with your resume to these firms, asking if they’d be willing to speak with you about an opportunity or provide information about their practice. If you do this, I guarantee that some will respond and you’ll find people interested in talking to you.
You don’t need to sit around waiting for opportunities or applying only through job boards like Indeed or LinkedIn. Do the legwork by reaching out directly to firms in every city where you'd be willing to work. For example, there are hundreds of cities in California alone, and all of them have law firms. This approach can open up thousands of opportunities.
What should you do if you're looking for a job and want to apply this strategy?
Let’s say you’re interested in corporate law in a smaller city like Oxnard, California. Do a quick search for corporate attorneys in that area, and you’ll find pages of law firms that specialize in corporate work. Look them up, send an email with your resume, and express your interest in corporate law. Even if they’re not actively hiring, many will be open to an informational interview or might even have an opportunity they hadn’t posted yet.
How powerful is this strategy?
It’s incredibly powerful. I had a law firm in Malibu for about 10 years, and in that entire time, I only received two cold inquiries from attorneys looking for work. That means there’s a huge untapped potential for attorneys who are willing to take the initiative and contact firms directly. You can apply this strategy anywhere—whether you're in California, Idaho, or any other state.
You do not need to be unemployed or feel like you have to settle. If you target law firms in your practice area and reach out to enough places, you will find opportunities. This approach can change the course of your career.
So, what’s the takeaway?
Anyone can get a job. Whether you're a law student or an experienced attorney, you have the power to find positions by proactively reaching out to law firms. Your ability to do the legwork and contact potential employers directly will set you apart from the crowd. Take control of your job search, target the right cities and firms, and you’ll greatly increase your chances of landing a position.
During the presentation, you mentioned having a focused resume, like specializing in one area of the law. You also mentioned that it's bad to have gaps in your resume when you're not working. Is it better to have a resume gap, or is it better to take a job in a field that is not within the field you're starting to specialize in? The reason for taking the job is that I'm not specializing in it, but it's mostly for economic reasons and to get some experience.
The number one rule for all attorneys—write this down—is to always have work to do. That's it. Always have access to work. Work as an associate, counsel, or partner—not as a contract attorney, not as a temp attorney, not as anything else. Your number one role is to always have access to work. If you lose access to work, everything is over—game over.
That’s what partners need to do, that’s what law firms need to do, and that’s what associates and new attorneys need to do. You always need to have access to work. If you don’t have access to work, you’re doing something wrong.
The example I showed you earlier, where there are thousands of cities in California, shows that you can always apply to firms in those cities and get some interest. You always need to have access to work.
You mentioned taking a job in a field that is not in the field you're specializing in. No. There’s so much opportunity out there—why would you settle for something outside your area? It doesn’t make sense to do that because there are plenty of places you can work. No matter where you’re located, if you’re aggressive and represent yourself well, you can get positions in your desired practice area.
Should you take a job in a firm where you're not specializing for economic reasons or just to get some experience?
Yes, if you’re truly out of options and you haven't conducted the type of search I’m recommending. In that case, you need to do whatever you can to get a job.
For example, my second wife—she was a trademark attorney in Palo Alto. She lost her job because the firm didn’t have enough trademark work. At the time, there was only one other trademark opening in the entire state, and she didn’t get it after interviewing. So, she had to decide what to do next. The only firms interviewing her at that point were insurance defense firms, paying significantly less than what she had been earning.
So, yes, in situations like that, you take the job, even if it’s not in your specialty, because you can never stop working.
Another interesting thing to note is that any attorney can learn a new practice area. When you go to law school, they don’t train you to be a corporate attorney or a tax attorney specifically—you can adapt and learn new areas of law. So, if you have to, take the job to keep working. You can make a lot of money in any practice area if you commit to it, whether it’s insurance defense, litigation, patent law, or anything else. If you work hard and become an expert, you can always be successful.
How often, in your experience, do law firms view entrepreneurial tendencies as a potential asset rather than a liability? Are there particular types of firms or practice areas where being entrepreneurial might actually enhance my candidacy, and how can I identify these firms during my job search?
Good question. Entrepreneurial attorneys are often perceived as people who want to start businesses, might take clients with them, and may leave to start a business. They can be seen as people who won’t be happy staying put for long and are always itching to do something different.
Typically, law firms are not made up of entrepreneurs—they’re made up of people who can sit at desks, take assignments, follow orders, and work on cases or projects over long periods of time. Instead of starting things and running things, attorneys help those who do. For instance, even in areas like insurance defense, you’re defending companies or individuals in lawsuits rather than starting or running your own business.
Are there certain types of firms or practice areas where being entrepreneurial might be a good fit?
Yes, there are. Personal injury firms, for instance, can be a good fit for entrepreneurial attorneys because some firms offer a percentage of settlements or money you bring in. Small firms might value someone who brings in clients, whether for personal injury cases, trusts and estates, or other consumer-facing practice areas. So, there are essentially two types of firms:
- Consumer-facing firms – These are firms that serve individuals, such as those dealing with personal injury, trusts and estates, or criminal defense. In these firms, being entrepreneurial can be an asset because you’re encouraged to bring in clients and develop business.
- Company-facing firms – These are firms that serve businesses. Here, entrepreneurship is less valued because the firm expects you to work hard on behalf of large companies. You’re not expected to bring in business but to focus on handling complex legal issues for companies that often have large legal budgets.
How can you identify these firms during your job search?
Look at the nature of the firm's clientele. If they serve individuals (e.g., personal injury or family law), those firms are typically more entrepreneurial. If they serve large corporations or businesses, they are usually less entrepreneurial and more focused on providing in-depth legal services. A lot of attorneys who don’t attend top law schools often find themselves in consumer-facing firms and end up doing very well because they’re able to develop their own client base.
Entrepreneurial tendencies are generally better suited to consumer-facing practices because they allow you to develop your own business, whether it’s through trusts and estates, personal injury, or family law. These areas offer the ability to start your own firm later, which can lead to significant success.
Can you give an example of entrepreneurial attorneys in action?
Absolutely. Trusts and estates attorneys, for example, often host dinners with elderly clients to explain the importance of estate planning, and personal injury attorneys find clients through various means. These attorneys can build their own businesses over time, and that’s what entrepreneurial attorneys tend to excel at.
In contrast, company-facing attorneys are often less entrepreneurial because they’re expected to focus on working for larger corporations. The more entrepreneurial opportunities tend to be in consumer-facing areas where you’re working directly with individuals.
How often, in your experience, do law firms view entrepreneurial tendencies as a potential asset rather than a liability? Are there particular types of firms or practice areas where being entrepreneurial might actually enhance my candidacy, and how can I identify these firms during my job search?
Good question. Entrepreneurial attorneys are often perceived as people who want to start businesses, might take clients with them, and may leave to start a business. They can be seen as people who won’t be happy staying put for long and are always itching to do something different.
Typically, law firms are not made up of entrepreneurs—they’re made up of people who can sit at desks, take assignments, follow orders, and work on cases or projects over long periods of time. Instead of starting things and running things, attorneys help those who do. For instance, even in areas like insurance defense, you’re defending companies or individuals in lawsuits rather than starting or running your own business.
Are there certain types of firms or practice areas where being entrepreneurial might be a good fit?
Yes, there are. Personal injury firms, for instance, can be a good fit for entrepreneurial attorneys because some firms offer a percentage of settlements or money you bring in. Small firms might value someone who brings in clients, whether for personal injury cases, trusts and estates, or other consumer-facing practice areas. So, there are essentially two types of firms:
- Consumer-facing firms – These are firms that serve individuals, such as those dealing with personal injury, trusts and estates, or criminal defense. In these firms, being entrepreneurial can be an asset because you’re encouraged to bring in clients and develop business.
- Company-facing firms – These are firms that serve businesses. Here, entrepreneurship is less valued because the firm expects you to work hard on behalf of large companies. You’re not expected to bring in business but to focus on handling complex legal issues for companies that often have large legal budgets.
Consumer-facing firms tend to be more entrepreneurial because they rely on individual clients and smaller cases, whereas company-facing firms are often more traditional, expecting hard work rather than client development from junior attorneys.
How can you identify these firms during your job search?
Look at the nature of the firm's clientele. If they serve individuals (e.g., personal injury or family law), those firms are typically more entrepreneurial. If they serve large corporations or businesses, they are usually less entrepreneurial and more focused on providing in-depth legal services. A lot of attorneys who don’t attend top law schools often find themselves in consumer-facing firms and end up doing very well because they’re able to develop their own client base.
Entrepreneurial tendencies are generally better suited to consumer-facing practices because they allow you to develop your own business, whether it’s through trusts and estates, personal injury, or family law. These areas offer the ability to start your own firm later, which can lead to significant success.
Can you give an example of entrepreneurial attorneys in action?
Absolutely. Trusts and estates attorneys, for example, often host dinners with elderly clients to explain the importance of estate planning, and personal injury attorneys find clients through various means. These attorneys can build their own businesses over time, and that’s what entrepreneurial attorneys tend to excel at.
In contrast, company-facing attorneys are often less entrepreneurial because they’re expected to focus on working for larger corporations. The more entrepreneurial opportunities tend to be in consumer-facing areas where you’re working directly with individuals.
Here’s a great confrontational question that could get me in so much trouble for answering and could blackball me from the legal community for the rest of my life. Can you explain to a law firm that you were passed over for an opportunity and then forced to leave because of aggressive DEI practices in a law firm?
Okay. So I’m assuming DEI means diversity, equity, and inclusion.
I don’t know a lot about this, although I wrote a book—probably the only person in the world who wrote a book about law firm diversity. If you search "law firm diversity Harrison Barnes," you’ll find my book, as well as some attacks I received for other articles I’ve written about diversity and inclusion. It’s crazy, but here we are.
How do you explain to a law firm that you were passed over due to aggressive DEI practices?
You don’t explain it. You simply don’t say anything about it. Instead, use one of the standard reasons I mentioned earlier: something like "There wasn’t enough work in my practice area," "It wasn’t a good fit," or "I want to focus more on my practice area." You don’t talk about diversity or inclusion—this is one of those topics you avoid because it’s explosive, and people can get very angry about it.
It’s important to avoid these kinds of topics because bringing them up can hurt you. If you’re good enough at your job and in your practice area, you shouldn’t let this hold you back. Just don’t make it part of the conversation.
Let me share a relevant story. I was speaking to a recruiter who focuses on law firm placements, especially partner placements. He was about to make a significant partner placement at a major law firm—think of firms like Baker McKenzie in size. The chair of the firm at the time was not diverse. The recruiter was close to finalizing the placement, with a fee of over $1,000,000. But right before the offer was extended, a new chair—a woman—was appointed. She came in and said, "We only want to bring in diverse partners." As a result, even though this candidate had a ton of business, they couldn’t get the job.
So, yes, there is a push for diversity to correct past societal imbalances, and sometimes it may affect you. But how do you explain this to a law firm? You don’t. Simply come up with other reasons, as I’ve mentioned before.
Can you provide more insight into how the size of a law firm might influence the ideal application? Also, how should an attorney adjust their application strategy depending on whether they’re applying to small or large law firms?
Good question. The answer is that larger law firms are more structured.
What does that mean?
It means that larger firms typically have a hiring plan based on specific needs. For example, if you’re trying to get hired as a first-year attorney, you’ll probably need to interview with the firm during the first semester of your third year of law school. Larger firms won’t hire opportunistically; they’ll only hire when they have a need in a specific practice area.
Smaller law firms, however, are less structured. They will hire opportunistically, meaning if they like someone who comes along, they’ll hire them even if they don’t have a formal opening. Newer firms are even more opportunistic.
So, how should you adjust your strategy?
If you’re trying to get a job at a smaller firm, you can often throw your application into the hat, and if they like you, they may hire you. For larger firms, you need to apply when they have a specific opening that matches your practice area.
The key strategy for candidates is to always try to get positions at smaller firms because they tend to have less structure, making it easier to get hired. I think it’s insane for anyone to struggle to get a job, especially if they’re willing to look at smaller firms and smaller markets.
Does being dual-qualified in another country make a candidate more appealing to firms with international law practices?
Yes, it can be beneficial. Being dual-qualified—licensed to practice in more than one country—can make you more appealing to firms that handle international legal matters. Firms with cross-border transactions, international clients, or global offices will value someone who can navigate different legal systems. This can also be advantageous in fields like international arbitration, mergers and acquisitions, or trade law.
How much of a factor is age when making a transition from in-house to a law firm? Does adding additional certifications and licenses in relevant fields make a candidate more attractive? Is portable business necessary to have for a role in a law firm?
Okay. Great question. Just one second, I'll be back in 30 seconds—I have to deal with an animal. This may be one of the most entertaining things you'll ever see in a webinar. You’ll probably never see anything like this again. This is my parrot.
I don’t know if you can see her in the background—there she is. She was outside squealing, so I had to bring her inside. She’s going to keep me company for the rest of this webinar. I hope this is as entertaining for you as it is for me—although it’s kind of annoying for me!
Is age a factor when transitioning from in-house to a law firm?
Yes, age is definitely a factor when making the transition from in-house to a law firm. It’s much more difficult to get a position at a law firm when you’re older and coming from an in-house role. It’s not impossible, but it’s extremely difficult.
Does adding certifications and licenses in relevant fields make a candidate more attractive?
Adding certifications and licenses can help, but they won’t overcome the main challenges you face when transitioning from in-house, especially if you’ve been in-house for a long time or if you're older. Certifications are nice, but law firms typically want attorneys who already have relevant law firm experience.
Is portable business necessary to have for a role at a law firm?
Yes, if you're a senior attorney, having portable business is important. Law firms want to hire attorneys who can bring in clients and revenue. The more business you have, the more attractive you become to potential employers.
Let me also mention something else—an interesting observation. I’ve had many international attorneys come to me with LLMs (Master of Laws degrees) from U.S. schools. It’s very expensive to obtain an LLM, and many people pursue it in hopes of passing the bar and becoming a U.S. attorney. However, I would say that about 95% of the time, it’s not worth the money and effort. It’s incredibly difficult for international attorneys to find jobs in the U.S. without prior U.S. legal experience, so it’s something to seriously consider before making that investment.
You highlighted that law firms stop considering candidates sometimes because they are interviewing others. What strategies would you recommend for attorneys who are applying to multiple firms simultaneously to ensure they’re not left out of consideration? Additionally, how can an attorney tactfully follow up with a firm to check on their application status without appearing overly eager or desperate?
Great question. One point I made earlier is that you shouldn’t worry too much about one firm not being interested in you. There are so many firms out there—think of it like dating. Just because one person isn’t interested doesn’t mean there aren’t plenty of other options out there. You shouldn’t get hung up on one opportunity. There are literally thousands of firms you can apply to, depending on your practice area and location.
Now, to answer your question directly:
What strategies should you use to ensure you're not left out of consideration?
Here’s a strategy that you might not like: send a physical letter. Email is overused, and it’s easy for your application to get lost in the shuffle. Send a postal letter to the head of the practice area you’re interested in at the firm. This method stands out and makes a bigger impact. It’s also a way to make sure that your application gets directly to the decision-makers, not just HR.
For example, let’s say you’re looking for employment law opportunities in Illinois. You can search for firms in cities like Champaign, Illinois, and find the names of attorneys in the employment law practice area. Send your application to both HR and the head of the practice area. This increases your chances of being considered.
How can you tactfully follow up on your application?
You can follow up with a brief, polite email to HR or the head of the practice area, but don’t overdo it. The firm will get back to you if they’re interested. However, the main point I want to make is that there are so many opportunities out there, you shouldn’t put all your eggs in one basket. Keep applying to multiple firms.
Remember, there are tens of thousands of firms where you could potentially work. So don’t worry if one doesn’t respond right away—there are plenty more out there!
Really, you know, following up is not something that, the majority of the time, is going to help you very much. You certainly can, but the way to really get noticed, the way to get exposed, is to send a letter. Send a letter to HR and send a letter to the person in charge of their practice area.
Why is that so powerful?
It's powerful because no one is sending letters. Everyone is just sending emails, and emails get deleted. When you send a letter, it sits on someone's desk, and when it sits on someone's desk, it's much more likely to get attention than an email. So, that’s how I would recommend doing that.
What's the most marketable bar to belong to? Do you have any strategies for bar associations for in-house counsel?
Thank you, that’s a good question. New York is a good bar because there are so many cities and places you can work in New York, so that gives you more opportunities. But keep in mind that when you get admitted to the bar in smaller states, like Nevada—well, maybe not so small these days—but if you try to work in a less populated state, you’ll have much better luck than in a highly populated state. You go where there aren't a lot of attorneys like you.
In many cases, if you try to work in a state where there aren’t many attorneys, there's less competition for jobs. New York is very competitive because so many people want to work there. So, while there may be many opportunities, there are also far more attorneys than jobs. Whereas if you try to work in a place like Kansas or the Dakotas, there just aren’t as many people admitted to the bar, and that can help you when job searching.
As for getting admitted as in-house counsel, different states have different methods for admitting in-house counsel. You can often be admitted to work as in-house counsel for a company, but there are limitations on what you can do. So, it varies by state.
In the webinar, you mentioned that applying too late severely impacts an attorney's chances of getting an interview. Could you please elaborate on how early one should ideally apply to maximize their chances? Are there specific times of the year or stages of the recruitment process where timing becomes even more critical, particularly for different practice areas?
Okay. What I meant by applying too late is that when a law firm has a job opening, if you apply after the opening has been out for a while, your odds of getting the job are much lower. That’s because they’ve probably already started interviewing candidates. So, applying early is crucial.
When is timing more critical?
In larger cities and firms, timing is more critical because they get so many applications. If you're applying to places where there aren't as many applicants, like West Texas, for instance, you might have better odds even if you apply later.
As for timing throughout the year, I’ve found that November through December is a great time to apply because fewer people are applying for jobs during that time, so there’s less competition. Conversely, after the new calendar year, firms often open up positions, particularly in January, as people leave after receiving their bonuses. So, the start of the year can also be a good time to apply.
You mentioned that one of the reasons attorneys don’t get interviews is because they don’t convey long-term potential. For those with a history of short stints at firms, how can they address this concern in their application and interviews to reassure employers of their commitment?
There are a couple of ways to handle this. First, if you’ve been at several firms in a short period, one strategy is to list your current job and, in a summarized way, include previous firms under the same heading. For example, you could say:
"Corporate Associate, Smith & Co., January 2010 - Present, previously with X Firm and Y Firm."
This approach groups your experience and doesn’t highlight the short stints as much.
In terms of conveying long-term potential, it’s important to show consistency in your practice area on your resume and make your moves explainable. For example, moving from one firm to a more focused or prestigious firm in the same practice area is easier to explain than jumping between completely different fields.
I went to a law school that followed a rigorous C-curve, and my GPA is lower compared to other law schools. However, I graduated cum laude and finished a full semester early. How does one overcome the relative difference in GPA compared to other candidates?
You don’t need to focus on your GPA too much. You can simply say you graduated cum laude from your law school. That’s enough. If a law firm is interested in your background, seeing that you graduated with honors will often be sufficient. You don’t need to bring up your grades unless they specifically ask.
This next question is about unconscious bias.
Yes, bias exists, and firms are aware of it. Law firms today are much more conscious of unconscious bias and are making efforts to correct it. I once had a situation 20 years ago where a law firm didn't hire a candidate who was African American, and the partner later questioned whether unconscious bias had affected their decision.
Today, firms are aware of their past mistakes and are working to avoid them. However, my advice is to focus on your qualifications and avoid bringing up anything that might bias a firm against you, whether it’s race, sexual orientation, or anything else.
Is it possible to switch from litigation to corporate as a junior associate? How do you make that happen?
The best way to switch practice areas is within your current firm. Lobby for work in the area you’re interested in and try to make that transition internally. If that’s not possible, the next best option is to look for smaller firms or firms in less competitive markets that might be more flexible about hiring someone who wants to switch. It’s not impossible, but it can be challenging, especially at larger firms.
About Harrison Barnes
Harrison Barnes is a prominent figure in the legal placement industry, known for his expertise in attorney placements and his extensive knowledge of the legal profession.
With over 25 years of experience, he has established himself as a leading voice in the field and has helped thousands of lawyers and law students find their ideal career paths.
Barnes is a former federal law clerk and associate at Quinn Emanuel and a graduate of the University of Chicago College and the University of Virginia Law School. He was a Rhodes Scholar Finalist at the University of Chicago and a member of the University of Virginia Law Review. Early in his legal career, he enrolled in Stanford Business School but dropped out because he missed legal recruiting too much.
Barnes' approach to the legal industry is rooted in his commitment to helping lawyers achieve their full potential. He believes that the key to success in the legal profession is to be proactive, persistent, and disciplined in one's approach to work and life. He encourages lawyers to take ownership of their careers and to focus on developing their skills and expertise in a way that aligns with their passions and interests.
One of how Barnes provides support to lawyers is through his writing. On his blog, HarrisonBarnes.com, and BCGSearch.com, he regularly shares his insights and advice on a range of topics related to the legal profession. Through his writing, he aims to empower lawyers to control their careers and make informed decisions about their professional development.
One of Barnes's fundamental philosophies in his writing is the importance of networking. He believes that networking is a critical component of career success and that it is essential for lawyers to establish relationships with others in their field. He encourages lawyers to attend events, join organizations, and connect with others in the legal community to build their professional networks.
Another central theme in Barnes' writing is the importance of personal and professional development. He believes that lawyers should continuously strive to improve themselves and develop their skills to succeed in their careers. He encourages lawyers to pursue ongoing education and training actively, read widely, and seek new opportunities for growth and development.
In addition to his work in the legal industry, Barnes is also a fitness and lifestyle enthusiast. He sees fitness and wellness as integral to his personal and professional development and encourages others to adopt a similar mindset. He starts his day at 4:00 am and dedicates several daily hours to running, weightlifting, and pursuing spiritual disciplines.
Finally, Barnes is a strong advocate for community service and giving back. He volunteers for the University of Chicago, where he is the former area chair of Los Angeles for the University of Chicago Admissions Office. He also serves as the President of the Young Presidents Organization's Century City Los Angeles Chapter, where he works to support and connect young business leaders.
In conclusion, Harrison Barnes is a visionary legal industry leader committed to helping lawyers achieve their full potential. Through his work at BCG Attorney Search, writing, and community involvement, he empowers lawyers to take control of their careers, develop their skills continuously, and lead fulfilling and successful lives. His philosophy of being proactive, persistent, and disciplined, combined with his focus on personal and professional development, makes him a valuable resource for anyone looking to succeed in the legal profession.
About BCG Attorney Search
BCG Attorney Search matches attorneys and law firms with unparalleled expertise and drive, while achieving results. Known globally for its success in locating and placing attorneys in law firms of all sizes, BCG Attorney Search has placed thousands of attorneys in law firms in thousands of different law firms around the country. Unlike other legal placement firms, BCG Attorney Search brings massive resources of over 150 employees to its placement efforts locating positions and opportunities its competitors simply cannot. Every legal recruiter at BCG Attorney Search is a former successful attorney who attended a top law school, worked in top law firms and brought massive drive and commitment to their work. BCG Attorney Search legal recruiters take your legal career seriously and understand attorneys. For more information, please visit www.BCGSearch.com.
Harrison Barnes does a weekly free webinar with live Q&A for attorneys and law students each Wednesday at 10:00 am PST. You can attend anonymously and ask questions about your career, this article, or any other legal career-related topics. You can sign up for the weekly webinar here: Register on Zoom
Harrison also does a weekly free webinar with live Q&A for law firms, companies, and others who hire attorneys each Wednesday at 10:00 am PST. You can sign up for the weekly webinar here: Register on Zoom
You can browse a list of past webinars here: Webinar Replays
You can also listen to Harrison Barnes Podcasts here: Attorney Career Advice Podcasts
You can also read Harrison Barnes' articles and books here: Harrison's Perspectives
Harrison Barnes is the legal profession's mentor and may be the only person in your legal career who will tell you why you are not reaching your full potential and what you really need to do to grow as an attorney--regardless of how much it hurts. If you prefer truth to stagnation, growth to comfort, and actionable ideas instead of fluffy concepts, you and Harrison will get along just fine. If, however, you want to stay where you are, talk about your past successes, and feel comfortable, Harrison is not for you.
Truly great mentors are like parents, doctors, therapists, spiritual figures, and others because in order to help you they need to expose you to pain and expose your weaknesses. But suppose you act on the advice and pain created by a mentor. In that case, you will become better: a better attorney, better employees, a better boss, know where you are going, and appreciate where you have been--you will hopefully also become a happier and better person. As you learn from Harrison, he hopes he will become your mentor.
To read more career and life advice articles visit Harrison's personal blog.
