New York Lawyer
July 16, 2002

Q:
My marketability is a puzzle worthy of Rubik: many honors in undergrad (including Phi Beta Kappa), strong performance with good reviews in 3 years with my current firm, relevant practice experience -- but not great law school grades.

The best explanation is that life threw me some curveballs, but I hung in and refused to quit.

As I work to make a career move and make more money, most law firms are screening me out on the law school transcript. What gives?

Submit Your Question

Find More Answers

A:
Frankly, what gives is that in a buyers' market, the folks screening your application -- and this may often be relatively low-level functionaries rather than hiring partners -- are either playing it safe, being lazy, or both. A crucial question for potential employers, one that law school grades don't address at all well, is what factors are most predictive of success in a real-life practice setting. The folks who focus primarily on your transcript are assuming that your ability to get the grades in law school classes is a full and accurate measure of: a) your innate intelligence; b) your ability to perform in a competitive setting; c) your diligence or organizational ability; and d) your level of motivation.

While not totally crazy, these assumptions don't bear up well when predicting job-related success. We all know of the myriad law review editors and coif recipients whose intellectual virtuosity did not translate into an ability to get the power to the ground. Many are great thinkers -- but not so great doers. Conversely, bootstrappers -- the folks who have to work twice as hard to get half as far -- often have a more vigorous, realistic and resilient motivational map. They try harder, and in many arenas legal success is more a matter of attitude than of raw smarts.

And besides, in your case, the raw smarts look pretty good, at least as suggested by your undergrad performance. It is unlikely that you suddenly turned dumb as a 1L. There must be some reasons why your law school grades suffered, and employers are entitled to ask you what buzzsaw you ran into. But given the other positive factors you cite, employers should not pass a death sentence on the basis of your grades alone. As an aside, I should note that research has shown that LSAT scores have absolutely no predictive value for legal career success. No correlation with money, partnership or career satisfaction. The only thing they have been shown to correlate with is first year law school grades!

We all know -- or should know -- that the best evidence of what you can do is what you have already done. Your PBK shows that you're smart. The fact that you passed the bar shows you learned enough at law school to earn your working credential. More important, three years of solid reviews shows that you can work well in harness, that your grades -- for some reason -- are not valid indicators of your applied skills. You may be getting dinged because, at the third year level, there's not enough evidence yet of maturing legal skills and judgment -- so employers default back to entry-level screening criteria.

Or maybe, every other candidate applying for the jobs you want has all your strengths -- plus dynamite grades (although I hardly think this is likely).

And, let's face it, there simply are some brain-dead employers out there. One major Philadelphia corporation insisted that its legal headhunter recruit only people who had finished in the top 10% of their class at one of 7 designated law schools -- for a senior position that also demanded over 15 years of relevant experience! Man, talk about a belt-and-suspenders approach to reducing the risk of a bad hire.

What can you do about this?

First and foremost, market yourself more through personal networking than through "conventional" avenues like responding to ads and approaching legal recruiters. Screeners are risk-reducers, not opportunists. Don't play. If the screen is giving you a particularly tough time, don't butt your ahead up against the screen; go around it.

Develop contacts, get seen -- grab every chance to make a first-hand personal impression.

If the neat job is in an ad, try to find out who placed the ad (ignore blind boxes) and then see if you can cultivate a personal introduction to the senior practice partner in the area where you want to practice.

Write a pithy summary not just of what assignments you've handled in the last three years, but of what you've learned in doing those assignments.

Get comfortable "telling the tale" -- conversationally, and never defensively -- about why your law school grades are not accurate indicators of your ability or motivation.

Ask for networking referrals to other people who succeeded despite sub-par grades or degrees from less prestigious schools. Talk to other bootstrappers and come-from-behinders. Then get referrals from them.

In short, your best tactic is to do all you can to emphasize and present the full, well-rounded human being side of your legal identity. Be ready with references from those who have seen you in action (if that's not too dangerous to your current employment).

If you can't stop some potential employers from being short-sighted, expand the range of people you talk to. At about your third-year experience level, savvy employers will know whether you are displaying a strong potential for growth and performance.

Law tends to pigeonhole people -- that's unavoidable. But push back aggressively against anyone who is content to pigeonhole you solely on the basis of your grades.

Sincerely,
Douglas B. Richardson
President, The Richardson Group