Litigation to Corporate Ultimatum Forum

[Anonymous User]

I just had my first annual performance review at my V20 firm, and was informed that if I wanted to continue practicing litigation, then I would have to look elsewhere. Instead, the firm wanted to give me assignments available in other groups to see if my "fit" would be better. Just a few days later, I find out they're rotating me into their busiest Corporate practice group. Interestingly, low-key this firm has been shafting some arriving first-years who thought they were going to enter into the Litigation group, and instead pressured them into doing a rotation in one of the Corporate groups instead. I suspect they are putting me in a similar situation, using my sub-par performance this year as an excuse to re-allocate warm bodies into their busier practice groups.

What's the cost-benefit here? I've never been a litigation gunner (didn't watched law & Order as a kid, never did Moot Court, etc.), but I also heavily catered my law school/summer experiences with a plan toward practicing litigation. What can I say? I liked research and writing. On the other hand, I generally have a passive, "go with the flow" personality, even when it comes to career planning. I could start applying for litigation at other firms because that was always my career plan/preference and it may just be awkward knowing my current firm "soft" fired me. Or I could try out corporate work that I hadn't really considered or experienced before, and ride it out as long as my current firm allows. At the end of it all, I may be in a better position when applying to other firms because I'll have experience in both corporate and litigation. I figured if my current firm really wanted to get rid of me, they would let me go without first trying to fill their ranks in the busier practice groups. I'm also not sure exactly what the current NYC market looks like for litigation junior associates.

All thoughts would be much appreciated.

[QContinuum]

It sounds like, in any case, you'll be trying out corporate work, unless you quit immediately without a job lined up (don't quit immediately!). Your firm has already rotated you into corporate. Even at the fastest, if you start looking aggressively today, you won't be able to start at a new firm until at least 2 months down the pike, and more likely at least three (taking into account the wait between applying and interviewing, the possibility of more than one round of interviewing, another wait between interviewing and an offer being extended, and background and conflict checking).

So, since you say you aren't married to lit, why not keep an open mind and see how you like the corporate work? You can still start looking to lateral, but if it turns out corporate is indeed a better 'fit' for you, you can also consider staying. IMO your firm isn't looking to let you go in the immediate future; it sounds more just like lit is slow and they need more bodies in corporate. So I don't think there's a risk that you're "walking dead" or anything like that - i.e., I don't think that you should feel like you have to lateral immediately.

[Npret]

It sounds like, in any case, you'll be trying out corporate work, unless you quit immediately without a job lined up (don't quit immediately!). Your firm has already rotated you into corporate. Even at the fastest, if you start looking aggressively today, you won't be able to start at a new firm until at least 2 months down the pike, and more likely at least three (taking into account the wait between applying and interviewing, the possibility of more than one round of interviewing, another wait between interviewing and an offer being extended, and background and conflict checking).

So, since you say you aren't married to lit, why not keep an open mind and see how you like the corporate work? You can still start looking to lateral, but if it turns out corporate is indeed a better 'fit' for you, you can also consider staying. IMO your firm isn't looking to let you go in the immediate future; it sounds more just like lit is slow and they need more bodies in corporate. So I don't think there's a risk that you're "walking dead" or anything like that - i.e., I don't think that you should feel like you have to lateral immediately.

Sounds to me like OP has a job as long as they work out in corporate and that department stays busy. I wouldn’t expect OP to last past his next review. I agree OP has some time to make a move.

[Wild Card]

I started at a V50 firm last September, and very many of my classmates who wanted litigation were placed in corporate groups instead. I'd say about 25 people wanted lit and only 10 got it.

Did you actually do something wrong, to get pushed out of litigation? I'd be worried if they were putting black marks in your file just to push you into corp.

Sidley, Jones Day, White & Case? Please PM me if you're willing to disclose.

[QContinuum]

Sounds to me like OP has a job as long as they work out in corporate and that department stays busy. I wouldn’t expect OP to last past his next review. I agree OP has some time to make a move.

I think it's entirely conceivable for OP to last past their next review, even. It's possible OP is bad at litigation work for whatever reason, or has a personality mismatch with the senior litigators, but doesn't have the same issues with the corporate folks. I think it's possible for OP to turn this around if their new corporate seniors like them.

The reason it's usually hard for folks to come back from a bad review is because they're still stuck working with the same seniors going forward - seniors who already view them negatively. It takes a lot to change lawyers' minds once they've already formed a conclusion. This doesn't apply to OP because they'll be working with an entirely different group of seniors starting now.

[rowingmyboat]

I agree with a lot of the above posters. On the bright side, you'll now get to try corporate and see whether you prefer lit or corporate. If you love corporate, stick around. If you do not love corporate, try to leave as soon as possible (within a year).

I think you'll need to push back against your "go with the flow" instincts here too -- your career will likely outlive your time at the firm so you need to think what you'd like to be doing in ten years/what exit options are appealing to you. You don't want to end up in-house in twenty years working on agreements all day and hating it because your first job randomly put you in corporate because that department was having a busy year. What may be convenient now may box you in later. This sounds like a good opportunity to figure out your skills and interests and then take that path. You said you like to research and write, so if you find yourself missing that you'll have a good indicator that you need to jump ship.

[Npret]

Sounds to me like OP has a job as long as they work out in corporate and that department stays busy. I wouldn’t expect OP to last past his next review. I agree OP has some time to make a move.

I think it's entirely conceivable for OP to last past their next review, even. It's possible OP is bad at litigation work for whatever reason, or has a personality mismatch with the senior litigators, but doesn't have the same issues with the corporate folks. I think it's possible for OP to turn this around if their new corporate seniors like them.

The reason it's usually hard for folks to come back from a bad review is because they're still stuck working with the same seniors going forward - seniors who already view them negatively. It takes a lot to change lawyers' minds once they've already formed a conclusion. This doesn't apply to OP because they'll be working with an entirely different group of seniors starting now.

People in firms talk to each other and the corporate seniors will know that OP was told to leave litigation. If everyone at the firm knows this is just the partners way of moving people out of litigation and into corporate, then OP is probably fine.

I’ve never experienced a firm where people get bad reviews just to force them into other departments. So that’s my bias for saying OP won’t last. I hope I’m wrong.

[Anonymous User]

Sounds to me like OP has a job as long as they work out in corporate and that department stays busy. I wouldn’t expect OP to last past his next review. I agree OP has some time to make a move.

I think it's entirely conceivable for OP to last past their next review, even. It's possible OP is bad at litigation work for whatever reason, or has a personality mismatch with the senior litigators, but doesn't have the same issues with the corporate folks. I think it's possible for OP to turn this around if their new corporate seniors like them.

The reason it's usually hard for folks to come back from a bad review is because they're still stuck working with the same seniors going forward - seniors who already view them negatively. It takes a lot to change lawyers' minds once they've already formed a conclusion. This doesn't apply to OP because they'll be working with an entirely different group of seniors starting now.

People in firms talk to each other and the corporate seniors will know that OP was told to leave litigation. If everyone at the firm knows this is just the partners way of moving people out of litigation and into corporate, then OP is probably fine.

I’ve never experienced a firm where people get bad reviews just to force them into other departments. So that’s my bias for saying OP won’t last. I hope I’m wrong.

OP here. Thanks for all the advice. Throughout the year, I definitely made individual mistakes that could have left a lasting bad impression (including a filing, though that occurred prior to my midyear review), and I never really got along with the senior on the case which I billed a majority of my time to. Not entirely sure where I stood with the partner. I don't doubt that my bad reviews were legitimate. I'm just not sure if they were firing-worthy had there not been some kind of need for shuffling among departments.

Ultimately, it's hard for me to know whether I performed poorly for litigation-specific reasons or more general ones. I may have had the bottom review scores of my litigation class, and the firm had some kind of quota. I don't know; may need to wait and find out if they moved anyone else. But it's at least encouraging to me that they didn't can me (or at least I'm not aware that they did yet/getting assigned to new matters), and for now I'll be able to work with new seniors to leave a fresh impression.

[PMan99]

I’ve never experienced a firm where people get bad reviews just to force them into other departments. So that’s my bias for saying OP won’t last. I hope I’m wrong.

That's actually why I think OP is safe for now. When biglaw firms really want to cut headcount, they'll just ice people out and ask them to leave. This sounds like the lit dept. is struggling but (as always) the firm is blaming the associates instead of the partners who can't bring in sufficient work.

[Anonymous User]

For what it's worth, I was put in a corporate group after requesting a litigation spot. Granted, I was placed there at the start of my time as an associate (but after summering there), but I didn't necessarily get the sense that I was being pushed out. It obviously wasn't a good sign, as a firm isn't going to move someone to a group that they don't want to be in if they really want to keep that person, but there are often legitimate workflow demands, and a firm isn't going to pay you a lot of money to sit around in a quiet practice group while another, busier group gets swamped.

They also moved a number of us from litigation to corporate groups, and about two and a half years later there are still some people there. So I don't think it's necessarily a "you have until your next review" situation. I would see it more as a second chance - you'll be working with new people so you'll have something of a fresh start, but I imagine they've heard some things about you, and if you screw it up, that might be the end of it. But if you're really not set on litigation (like I was) I would go into it with an open mind, and keep in mind the mistakes you made as a litigation junior and try not to repeat them now. But if you're a few months in and it's not going well, I would very actively begin the lateral search.

[Anonymous User]

Definitely rings a bell, because I'm fairly certain I used to work at the firm you are talking about (though I left a few years ago).

My advice is to be as flexible and open as you can, but don't let them take you off your path if its truly what you are passionate about. Sure, give corporate work a try, but if litigation is where your interests lie, don't let the firm (which only thinks short-term) set you on a path that is inconsistent with your long-term plan. See how things go, make a good impression, and be open-minded about it, and then reassess your options in a few months.

[mvp99]

mind PMing me the firm (if its in the higher-end of that v20 range)? I think i know which firm you’re talking about