Rifkin Consulting Report

I am a big fan of Tom Wallerstein’s articles – they are concise, well-written and address the realities of owning a small business.

The latest article discusses when it’s appropriate to turn down business…not an easy thing to do!

The decision to say “no” to business rests on several factors.

These include:

• Your firm’s bandwidth to handle a particular matter competently
• Expertise: it might be better to refer a matter out to a firm with a particular expertise
• Saying “no” to clients who have unrealistic expectations
• Clients who do not respect reasonable boundaries
• Clients who want you to act unethically – or – engage in borderline behaviors
• Legal conflicts of interest
• Opportunity cost; would working on this matter come at the expense of working on a more profitable and compelling matter?

Your time is valuable and one must be discerning when it comes to business development.  Tom wisely concludes that “When you’re selling your time, you have to care who your clients are. Even if a client is willing and able to pay, sometimes you should let her pass by without a look behind. Sometimes, you should just say no.”

Read Tom’s article at http://abovethelaw.com/2012/04/from-biglaw-to-boutique-just-say-no/

RIFKIN CONSULTING specializes in permanent attorney placements in California and nationwide. When the stakes are high,
your career deserves the most responsive, knowledgeable recruiter working on your behalf. Our recruiters offer a combined 25+ years of recruiting experience…contact us to learn more about our commitment to providing a high quality recruiting
experience.

RESPONSIVE. RESOURCEFUL. RESULTS.

www.rifkinconsulting.com

How can a small firm out-litigate a bigger opponent, even if the client has a smaller litigation budget?  Insightful article by Tom Wallerstein of Colt Wallerstein.

Tom discusses several aspects of the challenges – and also the benefits – of what it takes for a small firm to out-litigate a larger one.  While it’s easy to think that a large firm’s budget always dominates the question…in fact, the relative economics usually heavily weigh in favor of the smaller firm.

Included in these are:

• Fewer hours at a lower billable rate to prepare and respond to discovery requests can result in a significant spending
  disparity.
• If the client is small, fewer documents need be produced in discovery.
• Depositions may be less costly if the client is smaller, as the number of key personnel may be fewer.
• Large firms are predictable regarding their strategies.  Tom suggests that “In some ways, an erratic, unpredictable pro se opponent can be more difficult in litigation than an Am Law 200 firm which follows a well-known playbook.”

However, as Tom concludes, the small firm must “have sufficient resources and skill to handle a particular matter. But for a firm that does have the resources and skill, the size of the adversary firm or client shouldn’t matter.”  Read more at The Bigger They Are, The Harder They Fall…

Diane Rifkin, Esq.

RIFKIN CONSULTING specializes in permanent attorney placements in California and nationwide.  When the stakes are high, your career deserves the most responsive, knowledgeable recruiter working on your behalf.  Our recruiters offer a combined 25+ years of recruiting experience…contact us to learn more about our commitment to providing a high quality recruiting experience.

 RESPONSIVE.  RESOURCEFUL.  RESULTS.

www.rifkinconsulting.com

Congratulations to UC Irvine School of Law, which has surpassed expectations with regard to the number of clerkships achieved by its inaugural class!  Having recently spoken with a second year student at the school, I was impressed to hear how the original goal of providing excellent legal education plus practical experience is being achieved.  Few law schools offer this type of program – and the inaugural class attended free!

When I attended law school, I clearly recall wishing for such a practical approach to the practice of law.  Most students graduated believing they had few options that to practice for a large firm.  Book knowledge only goes so far…and I do hope that other law schools strongly consider this approach.   Read more about UC Irvine School of Law !

Great read for attorneys!  Along the lines of my recently published article in the LA Daily Journal and Recorder on 12/28/11, “Self Employment – Taking the Plunge”… highly-regarded attorney Tom Wallerstein [Colt Wallerstein] wrote a great new piece from a personal perspective.

Take a look at “From Biglaw to Boutique: Top Ten Differences “.  “Whether any particular change from Biglaw to boutique is a positive or negative is subject to debate, but I’m also sure there isn’t anyone who can deny it’s not just a change in style”…

During the last few years I have observed a trend; associate attorneys are focused more than ever on the total compensation package vs. receiving a bonus [especially if it is discretionary].   This holds true for firms of all sizes – except perhaps in the largest top tier firms where the huge bonuses (and prestige) are a major attraction.  Have others also noticed this trend?  How has the economy changed your perspective(s) regarding compensation?  Finally, I assume that this trend may apply to many industries besides law, so I’m interested in hearing from people in other professions.

Article published in December 28th LA Daily Journal and Recorder: “Self-Employment – Taking the plunge”, co-authored with Shannon Lamb of Stephens Friedland.

Based on our observation that an increasing number of attorneys have chosen to venture out on their own during the economic downturn of the last few years, our article discusses the reasons, benefits and detriments attorneys should consider before becoming a solo or small firm practitioner.

Terrific article on the critical value of strong relationships in business.  Check out Tom Wallerstein’s “From BigLaw to Boutique.  Looks Like Rain”. 

Right on target, Tom!  Relationships are the key to professional and personal success.  This concept is the cornerstone of my own business, and it’s rewarding in many ways.  Attorneys, particularly associates, need to understand that it is always a work in progress and takes a lot of time and nurturing.  Thanks for sharing!

******************************************************

RIFKIN CONSULTING specializes in permanent attorney placements with law firms and companies.  Visit us at www.rifkinconsulting.com

RESPONSIVE.  RESOURCEFUL.  RESULTS.

During the last two years  we have noticed a trend; more  non-partner level attorneys have struck out on their own to develop a solo practice rather than continue to work in a law firm setting.  Not all of these people appeared to have an entrepreneurial spirit.  Why did they take the plunge?  My sense is that their ultimate rationale focused on the principle of deciding to assume responsibility for themselves since the law firm environment has undergone so many changes.

Lack of long-term opportunity has been voiced as one of their major concerns, along with a strong belief that job security and  loyalty in many firms are just a myth.  Attorneys have also been reevaluating whether they even want to become a partner in a mid-large firm; the younger generations, in particular, seek a more balance personal and professional life.

Although self-employment certainly doesn’t guarantee job security or lower hours (due to additional responsibilities), overall those with whom we’ve spoken found a greater sense of purpose, fulfillment and adventure in their lives as their businesses became more  established.  It’s a very tough road to go down…and returning to a law firm after taking this risk is very improbable.  Nevertheless, some feel that they gained more control over the direction of their lives.

The point of this article might, on the surface, fly in the face of my profession; I work closely with attorneys as a skilled agent to assist them with securing fulfilling employment.  Clearly, self-employment is not for everyone – and I thoroughly enjoy what I do.  However, I also value my role as a motivator, mentor and supporter of attorneys with whom I’ve developed long-term relationships; I receive  tremendous satisfaction from watching these attorneys develop the confidence and focus to “step outside the box” and pursue their goals.

I welcome comments and insight from others who have opinions on this trend!

Hello Angela,

I have a friend working at a law firm that’s hiring; should I have my friend submit me for the position or is it better to let a recruiter submit me?

-David C.

Thanks for writing in David. We hear this question from our candidates often. They tell us that since the friend works at the firm already, and has an “in” with the recruiting coordinator, it might be better to have the friend submit the resume. Some firms will even offer the friend a referral bonus if you get the job. Objectively, several issues can arise if you opt to go the friend referral route. (Since there are a lot of players here, lets call the friend “Jane” for this particular example).

1) If you go with Jane, you won’t have the benefit of an advisor that knows
exactly what the firm wants and what they’re looking for. Not all
recruiters are great, but, if you can find one that you trust to do a good
job for you, it will benefit you a lot more than letting Jane submit you.
The recruiter will know the firm well, will have a good rapport with the
recruiting coordinator, and will know what the firm is looking for, and
(maybe more importantly) what might turn the firm off to an application.
The recruiter will help rework your resume to highlight the skills relevant
to the position, while also de-emphasizing trouble spots. (I know what
you’re thinking and you’re wrong. Everyone, including you, has trouble
spots!). He will write a glowing cover letter that will make your
application shine while also pre-empting any questions that might arise.
Jane probably won’t be able to offer you that kind of help or expertise.
She may not be keenly attuned to the best way to present you to the firm.
She might not know how to explain (read spin) your latest layoff. Despite
working there, what does Jane really know about how resumes are reviewed or
what Human Resources looks for in an application? Moreover, Jane is busy
billing 200 hours a month. She doesn’t have that kind of time for you or
your application.

2) Your representative in this process should be someone that the employer
feels comfortable working with. A part of what recruiters do is smooth out
questions or issues that come up when your application is being reviewed.
Decision-makers reach out to us and ask questions like “Is this candidate
really committed to moving to Los Angeles?” or “Is this candidate really
willing to take a pay cut to work at a small firm?” These are moments when
it’s crucial to have someone knowledgeable and reliable, in your corner,
working for you. Are you certain that Jane will do the best job of
answering those questions on your behalf? Do you trust Jane not to share
personal information about you that might inadvertently raise red flags?
(i.e. your spouse isn’t crazy about the idea of moving to LA.).
Additionally, the firm might not feel comfortable approaching Jane with
these sorts of issues. She might not be privy to a lot of what goes on
behind the scenes in HR either – there are confidentiality issues here as
well. Employers work with recruiters because they like having that buffer -
it’s a trusted third party they can turn to when evaluating a particular
candidate. By working with Jane, you might feel like you’re saving the firm
a couple of bucks, but really you’re just putting your application and
candidacy at risk.

3) You need someone with inside information to prepare you for the
interview “gauntlet”. You might think the obvious answer here is to go with
Jane. It’s not. Having worked with a firm for a while, a recruiter should
be able to completely prepare you for the interview; soup to nuts. He
should tell you what kind of interviewer the decision-maker is, what kind
of questions you can expect, what kind of questions to ask, and what topics
to stay away from. He might also fill you in on recent victories the firm
has had and/or tell you about the partner’s particular quirks or leanings.
Jane might not be as knowledgeable or experienced about those aspects of
the process. She might know the hiring partner, she might even work for
him, but does she know what he’s like in an interview setting? Does she
know what his specific needs are with respect to the position he’s trying
to fill? Will Jane’s lobbying, and a potential rejection of your
application, create a weird tension between Jane and the partner down the
road? Is that something that Jane is considering when she talks about you?
(I’m not trying to bad-mouth Jane here, but you know how office politics
work. Jane might be looking out for number 1).

4) THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ONE! What does Jane’s recommendation say
about you? What if Jane is not in good standing with the firm? She might
not even know it and/or might not be honest with you about it. We had a
situation like this come up several months ago. A candidate we were working
with told us that he’d rather have a friend submit him for a position.
After a long drawn out review process, this candidate’s application was
rejected; no interview, no explanation. The recruiting coordinator at the
firm later told us that the referral from that particular associate is what
made the firm nervous about considering this candidate. Obviously this
won’t always be the case, but it’s certainly something to be aware of.
There might be a proper time and place to have someone you know put in a
call on your behalf. But are you willing to bet your potential job on
Jane’s reputation at the firm?

I’m obviously biased, in that I want you to let me submit you for a
position because that’s how I make a living. But it’s important that you
give these issues some thought. How well do you really know your friend? Do
you trust her to represent you accurately? How much faith does this friend
have in you as a candidate or as an attorney? Will she go to bat for you if
need be? A good recruiter will be invested in you and your job search – his
interests are very obviously aligned with yours. Can you, with certainty,
say the same about Jane? Think about it.

Recently I spoke with a young associate attorney in which I attempted to discuss a strategy for the  ”follow up” interview, as his initial screening meeting with a top tier law firm had gone well.  Sensing some resistance on his part, I realized that the attorney wasn’t very interested in my advice.  In fact, at this point in the process, he clearly felt my duties were over.  Feeling a bit confused, I asked what he felt my role in our relationship should be, to which he replied honestly – “I figured you just set up the appointments.” 

I had mistakenly assumed that this attorney understood the diversity of my role in the placement process when we started working together.  I now realize that he may not be the only attorney who gets barraged by cold calls and emails from recruiters, only to occasionally wonder, “What do these people do other than send my resume to the firm or company and set up an interview appointment?”  I’d like to  answer that question so that you may be aware of some of the advantages and benefits that a good recruiter can provide to you.

1.     It’s Not All About The Money:  First, it’s important to point out that a common misconception is that legal recruiters have a singular interest – getting a candidate to move to a new job – enabling the recruiter to earn a commission.  Obviously commissions are very important to recruiters – it’s how we earn our living.  What you may not realize is that law firms or corporate legal departments require a “candidate guarantee”; if a candidate is placed at a firm or corporation, then is subsequently fired or if they quit, the recruiter is required to refund all or a portion of the commission (depending on how long the candidate has been in the position).  Because of this, recruiters must honestly appraise whether he/she believes that a candidate and a firm will likely be a good marriage.  If not, it’s in the recruiter’s best interest not to attempt to make the placement.

To be a good legal recruiter, one needs comprehensive overall knowledge about the legal marketplace.  If a recruiter is unable to answer your questions about a prospective firm or job opening – or seems uninterested in getting the information you are seeking – that’s a red flag.

 2.     Integrity, Trust, Responsiveness: As in any relationship, it’s important that you believe your recruiter (1) is honest, (2) respects your need for confidentiality, and (3) has excellent follow through.  Do they respond to you quickly and efficiently?    Do they keep you informed?  At Rifkin Consulting, we strive to touch base with candidates with whom we are actively working at least once a week – even if only to check in when there aren’t any new developments.  The worst feeling for a candidate is wondering if a recruiter is making any efforts on his/her behalf, or if perhaps they have some knowledge of a situation that they aren’t taking the time to share with you.   

 3.     Inside Knowledge: A good recruiter will not only know about a new position, but often he/she will know why the position is open.  Did the firm just hire a new partner who is bringing business with them?   Did an associate leave – and if so, were they fired or did they resign to take another position?  Did the firm recently get some new clients, which means they plan to be busier?  What is the firm’s history with regard to personnel turnover?  Is the position a recent development or has it been sitting on the firm’s website for months, and how serious is the firm about filling it? 

 4.     Good Recruiters Know What the Client Wants: When a candidate agrees to allow a recruiter to submit them to a firm, the recruiter should know what materials each firm requires with a submission.  Some firms insist on seeing both a law school and an undergraduate transcript.  Other firms require a writing sample be submitted along with the resume and transcript. 

 5.     There is No Second Chance to Make a First Impression: The best recruiters know what a good resume looks like, and they know how to advise the candidate to improve their existing resume.  Often a candidate may not have updated their resume for several years and a practiced professional eye can be very helpful.  Knowing what to include on a resume – or what to omit – can determine whether you get an interview.

 6.     What’s in Your Cover Letter?  A good recruiter will also include a cover letter with the materials that amplify and add context to the resume.  The cover letter will effectively promote the candidate’s qualifications and explain why the candidate is interested in the position, and the circumstances behind any professional moves the candidate has made.  Sometimes a recruiter may have a special relationship with someone at the firm other than the firm’s Recruiting Manager, i.e., a partner, and may decide to copy this person on the submission when it’s made.  Recruiters often know ways to push a candidate’s submission to a higher level in order for it to get more attention within a firm.

 7.     Interviewing Expertise:  Once an interview is set, a good recruiter should freely offer their candidates tips on interviewing.  In an interview setting, the candidate is usually at a disadvantage because the people with whom they interview usually have had much more experience with the interview process.  A little coaching – or a few simple reminders about common interview questions – can be very helpful.

 8.     Once the interview has taken place, smart recruiters will ask the candidate to debrief with them.   They should be sensitive to anything they learn that might require a follow-up call for clarification to the firm’s Recruiting Manager.  It is usually easier for the recruiter to get worthwhile follow up information than a candidate.  The recruiter deals with Recruiting Managers frequently and should have an established rapport.

 9.     Is Your Reference a Benefit or Detriment to You?  Other areas in which a good recruiter can be helpful to a candidate include determining the best time for the candidate to make contact with someone they may know in the firm for a recommendation.  Sometimes there can be a downside to this and it’s good to discuss the pros and cons in advance.

10.  Interview Scheduling: Not to be overlooked, but scheduling the interview appointments is an important part of a recruiter’s job, as is making sure the candidate is supplied in advance with the names of the attorneys with whom he/she will be meeting.  Having a chance to familiarize themselves with the interviewee’s web site bios can be very helpful prior to an interview.   Importantly, if you are working with a good recruiter, you have the benefit of having a manager who facilitates this process so that you can continue to do your job with little or no interruption.

 11.  You Have An Offer – Now What?  When an offer is extended, the legal recruiter should provide a good sounding board, discussing the terms of the offer, how it compares to the marketplace, and calculating the possibility of a counter-offer.  As in any transaction, an agent or representative can be very useful in helping to achieve the candidate’s goal.  A third party (the recruiter) is in a better position to negotiate and get answers to questions that a candidate may find uncomfortable to do on his/her own.

Accepting an offer is just one part of the placement process.  A savvy recruiter can guide you through the important stage of the conflicts process, references check, and giving notice to your firm.  The latter can be particularly sensitive, and proper preparation can make the difference between having a difficult experience or a smooth and civil transition.

12.  After the Dust Settles: After a placement is completed, a smart recruiter will stay in contact with the candidate to offer advice, particularly should a problem develop that could jeopardize the candidate’s future with the firm.  Your recruiter can serve as a sounding board and communicator with your employer and can be very useful for dealing with minor issues before they become real problems.

This is just a short list, and it by no means covers every possible aspect of the attorney/recruiter relationship.  Most candidates will not need all of our services, and others may need assistance that is not included here.  Every legal recruiter/candidate relationship is different.  However, one thing that a good recruiter is not…is merely an appointment setter!

dan@rifkinconsulting.com

**************************************************************

Rifkin Consulting works with clients who want to hire top attorneys, and applicants seeking to work for the best law firms and companies. Counseling services for firm clients include areas such as attorney retention, compensation analysis and the current legal market to help them maintain their goals and remain competitive.

 RESPONSIVE. RESOURCEFUL. RESULTS.

www.rifkinconsulting.com