Reply to Big Law - HR meeting out of the blue

Forum Index » Jobs and Careers

Reply to "Big Law - HR meeting out of the blue "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]In my experience "rockstar" doesn't quite mean that.  It's not the top performer, smartest, top performer, or most personable. It's who the partner decided to invest in.  Often due to connections, etc.  I didn't appreciate this when I started out. It sounds like it's still the same.[/quote]

This is the absolute truth.  Rockstars are chosen based on who the partners like the most or need the most because the associate has connections, or any other "soft" factor that gives them an edge past the merely super smart and hardworking regular associates.

If you're not one of the chosen few, you're going to hit the "up or out" ceiling and they will counsel you out just like they've done with hundreds of associates before you.[/quote]

That’s not true at all, there are [b]massive differences [/b]in talent and performance among associates, which are usually immediately apparent.  This whole “star associates are just the favorites” thing is, in general, cope by lower performers and championed by people on the HR side who don’t want to be held accountable for recruiting outcomes.  [/quote]

This. Most associates don't see their colleagues' work product. There's a difference. And the entire rock stars don't get let go just isn't true outside of huge practice areas. If work dries up, partners have to feed themselves first and they'll let go of a favorite associate long befoee they let their own pay suffer. [/quote]

I worked at a V10 and trust me, there were no “massive differences” in associates like you spoke of. Differences? Yes. But not to the degree that the two previous posters are saying.

Example: One first year associate is walked through, or given a checklist, of the major things that should be done when a new lawsuit comes (researching the judge, how to conduct initial case investigation interviews/document collection, that there is a template for federal confidentiality orders, etc.) She’s working for a service partner known for investing in associates. They happen to have gone to the same law school and have been in the same sorority in college. After that, she’s expected to know what to do without much further support.

Another associate is working with a busy rainmaker and told to just run with it; she hunts around Interwoven for a checklist as she vaguely understands that there are some best practices for when a new lawsuit comes in, but she’s given no meaningful guidance. She catches most of the good things to do, but maybe doesn’t realize that there is a template for confidentiality orders. She misses it and the partner is furious. Deep down, the rainmaker knows that it’s not fair, but it’s easier to blame a young associate than to blame himself. (Let’s not even get into the fact that there’s no meaningful training at most law firms to just make sure everyone is getting the same information.)

The reality that if you can get to these big firm jobs, let’s say V25 or better, you’re likely intelligent enough for the job. And you’re probably hard-working enough for the job. But getting the good breaks like the first associate in the above example can compound over a career at the firm. 
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics