Listen to the Newsletter!
Dear Friends and Colleagues,
taps microphone, Johnny Cash-style drawl
This one’s for all the lawyers out there.
Strums guitar
Back in the day, when the firm was called The Pekarsky Group and buffalo roamed free, we buttered our bread by working exclusively with the legal community. A third-generation Alberta lawyer—and, only slightly less-impressive, the Commissioner of the Calgary Lawyers Hockey League for nine years, it made sense to squeeze a bit more juice out of that LL.B. as I launched the firm, leveraging my relationship with, and knowledge of, the local legal community.
Fast forward 15 years and we’ve mostly emerged out from under the perception that legal search is all we do. Given our roots, it’s not an unfair assumption—just a misplaced one. Indeed, over the past decade and a half, our office has worked with 18 of the 30 largest law firms in Canada and placed over 350 lawyers into in-house counsel roles, nearly 50 of which have been General Counsel. Moreover, to this day there remain two ‘Recovering Lawyers’ in our midst—Erin Hoekstra being the other. And we continue to be a market leader serving both the legal function within corporations as well as the legal profession, working with those who choose to ply their craft at private law firms. I count lawyers and judges among some of my closest friends, lawyers are incredible referrers of search work, and I’m very proud to be a member of the profession.
Not surprisingly, then, our happiest problem all these years has been convincing the marketplace that we are much more than just a legal search firm. While it’s gratifying to be known as experts in the legal space, we go to great lengths to show our clients we excel across all corporate services functions and industries. For example, we have two CPAs in our office – Kevin Hall and Susie Besler – and have led nearly as many CFO, VP Finance, and Controller searches as we have legal roles. Same goes for Ranju Shergill, our resident ICD.D, who has leveraged her exceptional governance credentials by leading numerous board and C-suite searches. Still, one time, many years ago – and it has only happened one time – we were picking up a search for a VP, Human Resources at a company for whom we had never worked, and the client asked whether, by chance, we also happened to do any work in the legal space. As a matter of fact….
And so it was, a few days ago when I was reviewing our list of Top Clients of 2024 to invite them to something that our Top Clients get invited to, I noticed that I had to scroll down to client #23 before I found a law firm and, among the 22 that preceded, only five of the roles we searched for those companies were in the legal function. This is progress. And while, as a percentage, legal search remains a mainstay of our office, we have, as they say, diversified our portfolio.
Of note, and we’re not quite sure what’s been in the water this fall, but we’ve seen a sharp uptick in requests for legal searches in recent weeks. Not just the usual steady diet of in-house roles that have long populated our active search list, but a dramatic increase in law firms looking for lawyers. The reasons are many, and best left to the subject of a future post. But the sudden surge has spurred a lot of water cooler talk over here in the halls of Humanis Calgary as the ever-evolving war for talent opens on another front.
Here’s the thing about legal recruitment, especially for law firms — it’s very, very hard. Not that other searches are easy; they aren’t. It’s just that Law Firm Land is different. We are humbled by our hard-earned status as a trusted advisor to so many in the legal profession — from law students we teach at the front end of their journey, to retiring partners we coach at the back end of theirs — allowing us to do more than merely transact.
Please don’t misunderstand: Law firms do hire us for retained searches, preferring a consultative strategic advisor who will give them honest counsel (even if they don’t always love it), tapping into our knowledge of the market, comforted by our track record of successfully recruiting Partners and Associates, and respecting the rigour and research of the retained approach. But it requires an honest dialogue, an open mind, and an understanding that it won’t be easy. Here’s why.
Most Moves are Perceived as “Down Market”
Most lawyers are intensely competitive and have pride in where they work. They believe at some level that their firm is better than their competitors. They all tout their unique and differentiating “No As*holes Rule” suggesting, I can only assume, that all the as*holes must be at the other firms. It follows, then, that any lateral move is perceived as a so-called “down market” move. Compounding this is the perception in the legal community that if one is to make a move, it must be to one of the traditionally and purportedly more prestigious national or global firms. Even if this perception is part fiction part fact, we almost undoubtedly hear it when out in the market on behalf of local or regional firms, and it is those firms that typically engage us as they need our help in telling their story. (Fun fact: the big firms do, too, but they don’t think they do).
Money Talks
They say it’s not about the money, but it’s about the money. And lawyers don’t typically move for less than they’re currently earning. Indeed, they often seek a premium to “de-risk” the move. That premium comes in many forms beyond just a higher compensation package, often including some sort of downside protection and guaranteed term. Something that’s less expensive to offer, but harder to sell, is happiness. If you can satisfy the lateral that they will experience the Holy Trinity where happiness, compensation and quality of work intersect, you will have success without (necessarily) having to pay the ransom.
Portable Practices Aren’t Real…
Usually, individual lawyers underestimate the difficulty in moving their practice and overestimate the love their clients have for them. Larger firms are also very good at institutionalizing those client relationships such that they aren’t as portable as the individual practitioner believes.
…And if They are Real, That’s a Concern, too
If a lawyer can ‘guarantee’ their practice will follow them, that should be a flag. Firstly, because it’s likely untrue. Secondly, because if it is true that could mean the lawyer is a ‘lone wolf’ with sharp elbows who rarely or never exhibits the traits you would be seeking around sharing, cross-selling, and leveraging their relationships for the benefit of others. Clients aren’t dumb and so even if the one senior partner gets (or takes) the credit for originating that client, the client knows who’s really doing the work resulting in the ‘originating’ partner overplaying their hand when moving firms. Licking every slice in the box might work at your current firm, but when you switch, it’s clear which ones were really yours.
Lawyers, with respect, Aren’t Great Recruiters
Lawyers tend to be too busy practicing law to be supremely effective recruiters. Recruitment is a full-time job and one for which a lawyer can’t bill. Inevitably, like so many other non-billable activities, it slips down the ’to do’ list and the delay signals a lack of interest to the potential lateral who will likely check out, stay put or go somewhere else. Time is never our friend and one of our biggest hurdles in law firm recruitment is simply getting our client to move with any sense of urgency through the process. At minimum this is annoying for everyone involved in the process, at its worst, it’s disrespectful to the candidate who is interviewing and damaging to the firm’s reputation.
Lawyers, more than most, tend also to exhibit unconscious bias around hiring people who remind them of, well, them. And while they are great examiners and interrogators, they aren’t always the most gifted interviewers. Unlike corporations, with sophisticated talent acquisition teams and HR business partners to assist, not to mention a more varied and compelling story to sell, lawyers in firms are often left figuring out whether they like the person, rather than critically assessing them, and then find themselves with fewer arrows in their quiver than is ideal to effectively sell the role. Without the ability to truly differentiate the opportunity or highlight what makes the firm compelling, they may struggle to convince top talent to join, leaving candidates unpersuaded and opportunities unfulfilled. Lawyers in firms tend also to over-estimate the desire of the candidate to move when, in fact, the initial meeting typically involves the hiring firm to do the selling, while the candidate on the other side of the table does the buying. We’ve seen it too many times: after gently coaxing a reluctant candidate to meet with the firm and sternly coaching the firm on the candidate’s hesitance, the first question asked is, “So, why do you want to work here?” Cue the awkward response: “I’m not sure I do.” Doh!
Hiring a Search Firm is Expensive…
A retained search firm such as ours requires payment at three different stages of the search. One-third of the projected fee is due at the outset of the project, another one-third once the candidate is interviewed and the final one-third when the offer is signed. Our fees are calculated on a percentage of the income earned by the lawyer in their first year so no matter how you slice it, the firm needs to be prepared to spend some money.
…And There’s No Guarantee of Success
Just as a litigator can’t guarantee a courtroom victory, neither can we guarantee success in the boardroom. And like a lawyer who doesn’t refund their client after a lost case or a deal that falls through, we don’t either. In law, the facts and the law itself can be stacked against your client, and they might pay hefty fees for an unfavourable outcome. In our field, we’re only as effective as the combined strength of the story we take to the market and the ambassadors at the firm who represent it. If the firm’s brand, compensation, reputation, or all of the above, aren’t compelling, and if the lawyers selling that story aren’t convincing, even the best recruiters can’t fix that.
With all this, you can see why it’s tricky. If we had it our way, we’d pivot exclusively to selling retention programs to law firms, advising them on how they can keep their people. Oh wait, we tried that! Firms were not in the least bit interested. Today, our well-researched and comprehensive Law Firm Retention Program sits on a shelf next to our Y2K go bag, Covid-19 Flattening the Curve handbook, and our fax machine instruction manual. You might consider this a hot take, but we’ve come to the realization that law firms don’t actually want to retain their people. Or, at least, certain of their people.
Absent a motivation to solve a problem, can it even be called a problem? Each year the law schools churn out more graduates than there are articling positions. Add to this the influx of highly skilled out-of-province and foreign trained lawyers and the firms are on the advantageous end of the supply problem. They’re flush with choice. In fact, if they did work harder at retention, the system wouldn’t work. If every Articling Student who joined the firm on day one became a Partner 10 years later, the firm would collapse under its own weight. To channel Johnny Cochrane, The Firm Needs the Churn.
Perhaps this is best explained by another 90s reference; an episode of “Cheers,” where Cliff Clavin explains the Buffalo Theory to his beer-loving friend and patron, Norm Peterson:
“Well, you see, Norm, it’s like this. A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it’s the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Now, as we know, excessive intake of alcohol kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. And that, Norm, is why you always feel smarter after a few beers.”
This might be the beer talking but I’m starting to think maybe the firms have it right. By baking high turnover into the system, the least satisfied or underutilized lawyers leave, keeping the firm leaner and more efficient. By letting the slowest buffalo fall behind to sharpen the herd, the firm simply recruits when needed, rather than retains at all costs. Sucks for the buffalo, and certainly not the most cost-effective or compassionate way to run a business but, hey, it works for them.
And, for the most part, it works for us, too.
Regards,
Adam
