26. Transitioning from Associate to Partner: Titles Don't Matter to Clients, Methods Do
The conventional view is that the title "partner" is a marketing tool, and that it will justify the overnight hike in your rate. Clients don't see it that way, and neither do we. Titles don't matter to clients, methods do.
January 12, 2024 at 12:12 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Lean Adviser
We continue our miniseries on the big "transitioning" moments in the lawyer's career arc. In the first lesson in the transitioning series, we saw you plunged into the deep end with other newly-minted associates, being charged out at hundreds of dollars an hour, while figuring out how to bridge the skills gap, from student to associate.
Let's fast forward a decade or more. By now you've got the hang of it. You see how things are, you've got some work and you've had some successes. Clients like you. The firm likes you. You feel like you're ready for the next big jump, from associate to partner. Congrats! You've earned it!
Your firm feels the same way. You've been nominated and you've met the approval of the standards committee. This is finally going to happen. But just like when you left law school, being ready is one thing, being equipped is quite another. You're not.
From now on, you'll have to eat what you kill, while meeting both billing and origination targets. Just like the transition from student to associate, you're the same person today that you were yesterday, with the same attributes, only from today forth you'll be charged out at a higher rate than yesterday. Once again, there's a huge skills gap that you don't know you have. Once again, the solution on offer to you is likely to be unstructured informal training. Once again, this can be patchy. Another transition, another bumpy few years.
The common view among law firms is that investing in young partners shows commitment and reduces attrition, so it's an investment in the future. They're right about this, and so you might expect that your firm would equip you with the skills training to succeed. But, a recent survey found that just 7% of firms provided structured transition training for newly elevated partners. (See, "New Partner Training Is a Key Component of Law Firm Success," Law.com (Oct. 16, 2023).)
Over here at Lean Adviser, we try to see the root causes of the problem and offer a different approach. The conventional view is that the title "partner" is a marketing tool, and that it will justify the overnight hike in your rate. Clients don't see it that way, and neither do we. Titles don't matter to clients, methods do.
Truth be told, if you've been practicing "lean law" for a few of your associate years, you'll have been self-training for partnership. Your work will be planned, organized and focused. You'll be accustomed to specializing in your clients and solving their problems. You'll have a reputation for efficiency, effectiveness and reliability. Those are the hallmarks of go-to lawyers at any level of seniority.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllThe Narrow Path Back From Disbarment: 'You Have to Really Want to Be a Lawyer Again'
5 minute readNew Jersey Law Journal Names Mike Zogby Office Managing Partner of the Year
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Geo Group Sued Over 2 Wrongful Deaths
- 2Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
- 3Warner Bros. Accused of Misleading Investors on NBA Talks
- 4FTC Settles With Security Firm Over AI Claims Under Agency's Compliance Program
- 5'Water Cooler Discussions': US Judge Questions DOJ Request in Google Search Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250