New York Lawyer
June 5, 2001

Q:
What are my chances, after six years of practicing in a large firm, of getting a job in government?

Submit Your Question

Find More Answers

A:
Your employability in the government sector depends on a host of variables, chief among which are your area(s) of subject-matter expertise, what stage of your career you�re in, and how convincingly you can describe your long-term career objectives to a suspicious interviewer.

Remember the axiom that there are, in the end, only two interview questions:

1) What value can you provide in your new role? (the competency issue), and
2) Why do you want this job, anyway? (the motivation issue).

Although there is an astonishing variety of legal positions and settings throughout government, the primary purpose of government is providing infrastructure -- it shapes, measures and controls how we do things in society. Therefore, a large number of legal roles involve administration of some kind of compliance or regulatory system. So if you say, �I�m looking for something in government,� it is likely to be interpreted that you want to be some kind of administrative lawyer -- an enforcer, rather than an enabler . . . someone comfortable doing a lot of similar, repetitive legal tasks, rather than taking on non-recurring challenges . . . someone whose authority derives from Uncle Sam�s clout, rather than from their unique personal capabilities.

Early-stage lawyers who seek government employment often are seen -- correctly -- as motivated to learn and practice a particular area of expertise that enhances their technical credentials when they blast back to the private sector after a few years of experience. And one benefit of government legal roles is that they often offer greater responsibility and more clout at an early career stage. If this �instrumental� motivation is perceived as the job-seeker�s main rationale for seeking a turn in government, then it is expected that he or she will leave the government after no more than about three years -- because that�s how long it takes to master a technical competency and figure out how �things work in government.� Any tenure after that, the thinking goes, and you�re just marking time or signaling that you�re content to become a �lifer.� This �arrive-grab knowledge-and depart� pattern has been around forever, and it�s not unexpected -- so bight young lawyers who seek initial employment in government are often received positively. Employability quotient: high -- particularly you have communicate clear focus about the type of expertise you want to master in your �government apprenticeship� period.

A shift toward government work after six years, as in your case, sends a far different motivational message. It says, in effect, �I�ve been in a big firm long enough to see what it�s really like as a lifestyle . . . and I don�t like it. It�s too competitive, too confining, too mercenary. I may like the type of work I know best (or maybe not), but I want to move from being a �profit center� [makes the organization money] to a �cost center� [costs the organization money].� Such a career objective at this career stage also frequently is interpreted as reflecting a stronger career bias toward stability and security than toward ambition and individual achievement. Since the job market assumes that bright, accomplished people can and will self-select into jobs that are the best possible �fit� for them, your decision to make what appears to be a dramatic shift may actually raise alarms with government screeners interviewers -- Are your running toward something, or away from something?

Be prepared to explain your motivation for making such a shift at this point in your career (�Why this? Why now?�), and be prepared to explain why it�s government service -- better still, some particular form of government service -- that�s attracting you, not why law firm practice is so repellent. I know of a very successful plaintiff�s personal injury lawyer who, after more than a decade of big-verdict successes as a lone wolf, applied for a job defending the government against similar suits. The interviewer was skeptical: �Oh, I know you can do this,� he said, �but I really question your motives for a) switching sides, b) switching settings and c) taking on repetitive work. What�s your issue? Burnt out? Alcoholic? Spent all your money and need a pension? Looking for government benefits because you have cancer or are clinically-depressed?� He�d hit the nail on the head: the lawyer was suffering from severe depression, and simply couldn�t maintain his practice any more.

For lawyers, my experience is that the phrase �government service� is a misnomer if it�s intended to suggest a blinding dedication to civics, the body politic and commitment to the building blocks of democracy. Frankly, most lawyers enter law because they are by nature �individual contributors,� not idealistic team-players or society-builders. Accordingly, the �I want to make a difference� rational often rings hollow when experienced lawyers are pursuing what is evidently a re-tread career path.

At any career stage, however, proof that you already possess a high level of subject-matter expertise will incite interest in senior-level staff roles. I know of a 53-year-old ex-partner of a boutique firm who had no trouble landing a job with EPA Region 3. A tax partner in a medium-sized business firm has found a new home in the IRS. Understand, however, that the dynamics of the search change somewhat with the level of the position. When a position is high enough to qualify as a policy-making, executive level role, tenure often is dependent on politics -- not government. Patronage, at local, state and federal levels, holds strong sway at this level, so it�s imperative to have to cultivate strong sponsors who can open doors for you. At this level, hiring is not a meritocracy. Similarly, job security is diminished at this level, since it�s dependent on the party in power.

Sincerely,
Douglas B. Richardson
President, The Richardson Group