New York Lawyer
October 23, 2001

Q:
I joined my firm nine months ago as a lateral associate, and things got off to a bad start from the day I started work. I feel there is a personality conflict, or perhaps cultural conflict, at work here. The issue is not helped any by the current economic slowdown. Is there something I could have done before accepting the firm�s offer to guard against this situation?

Submit Your Question

Find More Answers

A:
We all know law firms get into lateral hiring in a big way when particular practice areas come into sudden vogue (and where a firm may be thin in requisite technical experts) or when an �opportunity� stands at their door � an attorney with a sizable hunk of portable business who is looking for a change in venue or improvement in the quality of food and lodging.

What�s less widely known is the enormous number of lateral hires � at both associate and partner levels � that limp badly, blow up or otherwise crater. Some firms �cut their losses� rapidly when the benefit of the bargain isn�t immediately panning out; others let things fester and devolve into ugly forms of passive aggression. Often the end comes with a whimper rather than a bang: �Ed, it�s just not working out� � which usually means the billables or client/practice development are disappointing.

Sometimes the disconnect is ugly, public and humiliating. It�s not unusual for folks on both sides to feel they�ve been conned, misled or bathed in rose-colored hogwash. You�d think professionals would know better, but lawyers aren�t known for their sophistication with �all this personal stuff.�

If many firms do a marginal job of selecting summer associates (most of whom are expected to get offers) or first-year hires, many more do a simply atrocious job of evaluating the potential of a lateral hire, and taking care of the lawyer once they come aboard. When deciding whether to hire a lateral, the economic argument generally reigns supreme, and matters of fit, assimilation into the firm culture, opportunity-sharing and status within the pre-existing pecking order simply do not get talked about. The road to hell gets paved with good intentions, dreams of immediate financial gain (on both sides), rosy future forecasts and unrealistic expectations.

To the extent the firm has a traditional career progression ladder, the laterals may unwittingly upset the apple cart and create resentment and competition, both with peers and younger lawyers (this is often called the �age and stage problem�). Often new laterals find themselves starved for a �rabbi� to advise them on firm politics and deprived of ample marketing, practice management and even legal support.

Certainly, firms have no malicious or overtly machiavellian intent. They�re not trying to make lateral hiring relationships fail. They just have never thought through how to play to the security, status, visibility and acceptance needs of a mature lawyer whose motivation is not driven solely by a frantic desire to survive. Lateral hires looking for a new home tend to �jump at the front door,� and do a poor job of understanding and negotiating what will happen after they move into the new office.

For both sides entertaining a lateral entry relationship, I urge everyone to slow down and remember the timeless axiom: �Always make your tightest contracts with your closest friends.� Don�t let the excitement of the moment curb willingness to ask frank questions and reality-test the assumptions that underpin the apparent logic of the relationship.

When assisting in evaluating and negotiating lateral relationships -- particularly at the partnership level, where the whole �entry into the club� issue often complicates matters -- I urge the use of the �GRPI Model.� This is simply a logical sequence of focused inquiry:

Follow the GRPI Model, and you'll be a lot less likely to end up at the wrong firm the next time you make a move.

Sincerely,
Douglas B. Richardson
President, The Richardson Group