Mid (or Small) But Mighty
Out with the Big, in with the mid (and small). Perhaps you joined BigLaw fresh out of law school, and you’re done. Maybe you’re in law school, and you’re not sure BigLaw is the place for you. Or maybe you’re not in private practice at all, and you’d like to dip your toe into law firm waters, but you read our last article about BigLaw and you’d like to know what else is out there.
Whatever the reason, pull up a chair while we discuss the merits (and drawbacks) of mid-sized and boutique law firms. (We can’t offer you a drink, but we don’t mind if you imbibe while you read.
First, some definitions. There’s no hard and fast rule about what makes a law firm “mid-sized” or “boutique,” other than “not on the AmLaw 100 list.” (See our last article for a discussion of the AmLaw list.) Many lawyers think of firms with fewer than around 200 to 400 lawyers “mid-sized.” Defining a boutique is even harder. We can all agree that a firm with fewer than 10 attorneys is a boutique; most agree that fewer than 20 is still a boutique. Fewer than 50? Fewer than 100? Firms in these size ranges sometimes call themselves boutiques and sometimes call themselves mid-sized. If you’re considering a move to a smaller firm, it’s worth asking your recruiter how many lawyers work at the firm (if you don’t feel like counting faces on a website). Finally, some smaller firms specialize in nice practice areas (e.g. ERISA, immigration, bankruptcy, etc.), and others are full-service firms. Many of the following attributes are applicable to both small and medium-sized firms - we’ll note below when there are differences.
First, you often get a far wider range of hands-on experience, at an earlier point in your career, at mid-sized and small firms. If you’re a junior or mid-level associate, you likely won’t get stuck doing hours and hours (and hours…and hours…) of doc review or due diligence, and nothing else, on a behemoth case or deal. You’ll have some grunt work, sure (we all made the choice to go to law school - you probably saw the grunt work coming from way back in the first semester of 1L year), but in most cases, you’ll also get to do higher-level work work much sooner than your counterparts in BigLaw. As recruiters, I often speak with mid-level associates at small and mid-sized firms who have taken and defended depositions, argued dispositive motions, examined witnesses at trial, and, on the transactional side, participated in deal negotiations, drafting sessions, and closings.
Relatedly, you’ll usually have more opportunities to work directly with clients. Getting to know your clients, and having them know you, is super valuable for a whole host of reasons: you might inherit them as your own, personal clients one day! You might decide you want to go in house and get offered a job by one of them! You’ll simply get better and better at client-facing work! From a client perspective, there are lots of reasons to love smaller firms, and the relationships are one such reason. Many clients of smaller firms feel that their attorneys really know and care about them - and who doesn’t want that?
In a similar vein, you’ll be more visible to partners and get to know them better. (This is a good thing, I promise. If you don’t like the partners you work for, that’s a whole different can of worms - and one a good recruiter can help with.) These deeper relationships with partners will mean better training for you, and an easier path to partnership. Indeed, many small and medium-sized firms hire associates on the assumption that all of them can/will make partner (unlike BigLaw, where the firms’ model assumes a certain degree of associate attrition before reaching partnership). You might decide becoming a partner isn’t for you, in which case you can still go in house, become a government lawyer, or run off and join the circus - but the option of partnership will usually, unless you really screw up, be available to you.
And why wouldn’t you want to become a partner at a smaller firm? After all, many boutiques and mid-sized firms have lower billable hour expectations and thus a better work/life balance than big firms. The billable hour requirements at smaller firms have a huge range. Some small firms might have an 1800-hour requirement - not only is this obviously less than the 1900-2000 range at most BigLaw firms, but many smaller firms actually mean it when they say 1800 hours are all that are required (none of this nonsense of an unspoken requirement that you work 2200, 2300, or 2400 hours). Other smaller firms have unusual models for hours requirements. For example, a smaller firm might require only 1500 hours, with guaranteed bonuses (usually a percentage of your base salary) for each 100 hours extra you work about those 1500 hours. Some smaller and mid-sized firms have no specific hours requirement at all! (Lack of an hours requirement is not an invitation to spend your workdays at the beach with a bucket of bon bons. That would be a surefire way to have no billable hour requirement at all, but in an unemployed sort of way.)
Caveat about hours (somehow, there’s always a caveat about hours, isn’t there?). There are some high-end boutiques that are not lifestyle firms. To their credit, these firms do not pretend to be lifestyle firms! These are places where the attorneys have chosen to work at a boutique for the myriad benefits such firms afford, but they aren’t interested in taking their feet off the gas pedals. Your recruiter will be able to steer you to or away from these boutiques, as you desire.
Finally, many lawyers find that boutiques and mid-sized firms can have less (or no!) bureaucracy, and that such firms are often more casual in other ways as well. Most people dislike bureaucracy (and if you don’t, maybe go work at the IRS?), but whether you prefer a more casual or a more formal setting is really a matter of preference. (I’m in sweatpants every day I can possibly get away with it, but I understand that some people just love wearing a suit!)
“Wow,” you might be thinking, “this all sounds pretty fantastic. Where do I sign up?”
I’m glad you’re excited - let’s just cover the (very few) potential drawbacks to working at a boutique or mid-sized firm. First, the biggie: salaries are usually lower. That shouldn’t come as much of a surprise, right? If you work 1600 hours, you just aren’t going to get the same paycheck as someone working 2300 hours. (Caveat: if you work at one of the high-end boutiques mentioned above, many of those firms pay market, or even above-market, salaries.)
Many smaller firms also have less administrative support (this is particularly true at boutiques, and less often true at mid-sized firms). “Less admin support” usually means fewer legal secretaries, paralegals, and even (if you’re a mid- or senior-level associate), fewer junior associates, which in turn means that you might find yourself doing some tasks (making copies, filing motions, etc.) that you wouldn’t ordinarily do. Some smaller firms even have a certain number of “creditable” hours built into their hours requirement, because they know you’ll be doing some work like this.
Finally, smaller firms can sometimes be less stable. Because smaller firms have fewer clients, losing a big client can have a correspondingly big effect on a small firm. Or, even without losing clients, small firms can sometimes be ripe for mergers with much larger firms - so you might think you’re joining a small firm, only to have it merge with an AmLaw firm. You won’t necessarily be worse off, but you might find yourself with an employer you hadn’t bargained for.
Smaller firms come in so many different shapes and sizes. If your recruiter presents you with an opportunity at a mid-sized or boutique firm when you think you want BigLaw, don’t write off the opportunity immediately. (We get sad when you do.) Even if some smaller firms won’t meet your needs, another smaller firm might be the perfect fit for you.