Targeting the top
An increasing number of law firms are providing their assistant solicitors with career planning support of some kind, whether internally via human resources or partner mentoring or through specialist external career management coaching. A key message in this approach is that individual lawyers should take responsibility for their own career development and planning and often this will be about making a choice between various career options (e.g. whether they aspire to partnership or not) and making and implementing a plan to achieve their objectives. Making partner in a law firm used to be the only career goal of a solicitor in private practice. Other options are now becoming more openly discussed but, for those who become partners, the paths they can take once they have been promoted are often unclear.
May 21, 2008 at 08:47 PM
7 minute read
An increasing number of law firms are providing their assistant solicitors with career planning support of some kind, whether internally via human resources or partner mentoring or through specialist external career management coaching. A key message in this approach is that individual lawyers should take responsibility for their own career development and planning and often this will be about making a choice between various career options (e.g. whether they aspire to partnership or not) and making and implementing a plan to achieve their objectives.
Making partner in a law firm used to be the only career goal of a solicitor in private practice. Other options are now becoming more openly discussed but, for those who become partners, the paths they can take once they have been promoted are often unclear.
Those who have achieved the status of partner (perhaps some years ago) are sometimes to be heard wondering if it is all it was cracked up to be. The world has changed significantly for law firm partners over the last 10 years or so. Increasing numbers of partners in law firms are not sure how they ended up where they are and whether it is where they want to be. Many lawyers entered the profession having either read law at university or because it looked like a prestigious and reasonably well-rewarded career or even (not that they would admit it) to please their parents.
The early years of their careers were full of short-term objectives to be achieved with the scramble of finding a training contract and completing the necessary exams, qualification and getting a few years of experience under their belts. Becoming a partner seemed to be the ultimate goal rather than just the first step on the next leg of the journey, with far fewer clear milestones: a stint overseas, a secondment, some involvement in the management of their firm or the distant glimmer of a sabbatical is about as much in the way of 'career objectives' for partners as most firms offer.
Thus the idea of a career plan which is the product of a conscious process of evaluating options and setting of goals is a novel one for many senior lawyers. Creating such a plan is not only unfamiliar but also seemingly difficult to achieve in isolation. Finding time to stop and take personal stock can seem almost impossible in the face of all the pressured demands (both professional and domestic) facing the busy partner. However, without a clear plan, the sense of just muddling along or even demotivating drift can all too easily set in.
The benefit to the firm of supporting partners in reviewing their career plans so that they can move forward with the new purpose and motivation is enormous. Partner appraisal discussions can provide some structure in which to discuss development planning, but it is clear from our experience of working with lawyers from more than 40 law firms that the chance to have a confidential discussion about their future career plans with an informed and objective expert is very attractive. The evidence for this view is not just anecdotal; in a recent survey conducted for The Managing Partners Forum, partners chose external career advice as the most attractive by a significant margin out of a range of possible initiatives including sabbaticals, flexible working, secondments, international opportunities and management opportunities.
The view that a law firm partner is some kind of hero who can do it all is increasingly being seen as the fallacy that it is; just because the financial rewards are good does not mean no other motivation is required and just because partners are intelligent and skilled at providing solutions to the issues that their clients present them with does not mean they can all manage their own careers without some support. A modest investment in offering partners a short programme of confidential one-to-one sessions with an informed yet independent person not only meets a clear need, but provides real benefit to the firm in terms of reinvigorated and more purposeful partners with a clear sense of their priorities and objectives.
Jonathan Macfarlane is director of coaching at The Professional Career Partnership.
Case Study: A change of role within the firm
A senior commercial partner in an international law firm had returned from a spell of several years in an overseas office and successfully resumed a fee earning and departmental management role in London. Having turned 50, he was feeling that it was becoming increasingly hard to maintain his motivation and was looking for a new challenge as well as a different balance to his life. He knew that he would not stay with his firm for ever and that he would like to explore ways of expanding his network with a view to identifying possible future roles outside the firm. He had been approached by headhunters and had briefly considered a move to another firm but preferred the idea of staying with his current firm for another five years or so before moving into a different mixture of roles outside the firm involving continuing commercial/intellectual activity.
Having reviewed his work styles and preferences we worked together to develop a proposal which he presented to his managing partner. The proposal involved a greater focus on several key client relationships in tandem with the younger partners who already had some involvement, devolving some other client relationships to other partners, reducing his managerial responsibilities, spending more time acting as an ambassador for the firm with the industry group in which he was most experienced (and in which it was likely his 'retirement' activities might be found) and taking on several formal 'mentoring' roles within the firm.
This was put forward with a timescale and suggested financial adjustments over a period leading to a proposed retirement date. After a small amount of negotiation this proposal was accepted and all concerned were able to move forward with the new arrangements. The partner was relieved and re-motivated and the firm benefited from both his new role and activities and the passing on of his relationships as well as his knowledge and expertise.
Case study: A major change of direction
A senior litigation partner at a medium-sized City firm wanted to look at a number of options beyond his current firm. These included a similar role elsewhere, a judicial appointment, consultancy in the industry sector in which his practice was based, moving further into the field of alternative dispute resolution/mediation or a more radical move involving training as a complementary therapist.
We worked together on a programme of structured research into the various possibilities using a variety of sources, including the individual's own network of contacts and some suggested by the consultant. There then followed an evaluation of the alternatives including their financial implications.
Having taken a couple of possibilities further, including making some approaches and pursuing openings that had emerged during the research phase, a decision was taken to enrol on a full-time training course and, some years later, the individual is working in a new role and enjoying a very different life to the one he had when we first met.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
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 All'Almost Impossible'?: Squire Challenge to Sanctions Spotlights Difficulty of Getting Off Administration's List
4 minute read'Never Been More Dynamic': US Law Firm Leaders Reflect on 2024 and Expectations Next Year
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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