As future lawyers, about to embark on a legal career, there is concern that we may be focusing on the wrong rewards…
The New York Times article, Lawyers with the Lowest Pay Report more Happiness, written by Douglas Quenqua, suggests that individuals entering the profession are concerned with wealth, status and stimulating work. However, recent research has found that high income and partnership track positions have no correlation with a lawyer’s happiness and well-being. In fact, lawyers in public service positions reported greater happiness. This research study was based on a psychological model of human happiness called “self-determination theory”. The model is based on competence, autonomy and connection to others.
Young Associates in Trouble, a research paper by David Zaring and William Henderson, concludes that most new lawyers are attracted to working for large, prestigious law firms despite their reputation as difficult places to work. The research conducted by Zaring and Henderson suggests that compensation, partnership and resume value are among the reasons these leading firms remain a fixture for new graduates. The authors accept that some young lawyers may see their experience working at an elite firm and the prestige associated with these institutions as a jumping off point into a more enjoyable career path. However, the author’s data indicates that individuals who remain with large firms over the long term do not show higher satisfaction in partnership than they do as junior associates. This is due to a work-life balance that does not necessarily change as the employee moves up the hierarchy.
An explanation for the unhappiness exhibited by young lawyers may begin at law school. Here, students are pushed towards mainstream, elite firms. Large firm marketing, “OCI’s”, and competition among colleagues may be to blame for this.
The articles above suggest that law students do not appreciate what they are signing up for when entering a new firm. Better information from school career centers, depicting “firm life” in large and small firms and urban to rural centers could solve this problem. My view is that there is a general lack of alternatives to big name firms. Schools do not provide students with the necessary explanation of alternatives to firm employment and students lack the knowledge of replacement options.
We have all been told that the profession is changing rapidly and how this may affect our employment opportunities in the near future. It is time for graduates to turn their mind to careers that fall outside of the institutionalized model. Pursuing innovative legal careers may be a solution to the happiness and work life balance young lawyers seek, without sacrificing both lucrative and stimulating work. By taking the approach that change means opportunity, the transformation of the legal landscape should be viewed with excitement rather than fear.
3 Comments
Rob, your post reminds me of another publication that reported that corporate lawyers generally report the lowest career satisfaction, mainly because of ‘selling out’, i.e. working too hard for money rather than sticking to their reasons for attending law school in the first place.
One of the primary reasons that big law still remains an attractive employment option for students is because of the convenience of the process. The OCI process is extremely streamlined: one application cut off date, one day for OCI’s, set dates for in-firm interviews, and set offer call day. It takes the uncertainty out of the job hunt process which is inherent in looking for small firm jobs. Additionally, big law has the resources to hire multiple articling students, sometimes more than there are associate positions available, whereas a small firm is better off hiring a first or second year call to hit the ground running.
My vision is to have the articling component built into law school curriculum. The option of completing ‘practicum’ terms during first and second year summers which will be counted as work experience towards the completion of articles. That way, the student will only need one additional month of supervised work experience in addition to the PLTC before being called to the bar.
Hey Ravneet,
I totally agree that articling/practical components should be built into the law school curriculum, and I think that graduates will emerge from law school with a greater sense of what it takes to work in the profession – more ‘practice ready,’ if you will.
In addition to the fact that the OCI process is streamlined and practical, I think that there is a direct correlation between students’ desire to work in big firms where they will end up making more money and the debt load with which the average law student graduates. While many enter law school with dreams of serving the public and improving access to justice for marginalized groups, the reality of one’s financial situation often leads students in a different direction. It is difficult to compete with the draw of a large paycheck when staring down the barrel of overwhelming student debt. I think the solution lies somewhere between making a legal education more affordable in general and offering debt forgiveness programs for those who desire to do public interest work.
Great post Rob. Really interesting thoughts here on big firms and the life associated with them. When you’re in school, a big firm seems like the dream job and the peak of the profession. It looks like something we all want to strive for. You’re right that enough focus isn’t given to the alternatives to this and what they are like. I believe that not everybody is built for the life of work at a big firm. From the lawyers I have talked to, the work-life balance associated with big firms is not something everybody will enjoy adapting to. I think the happiness correlation you spoke of illustrates this as well. Most want to try that life and not all will like it.