In the Big Law-Mid Law Talent Tango, Who's Taking the Lead?

The appeal of Big Law, for associates and partners alike, is clear. The financial rewards are unmatched in the profession. As is often the case, prestige and money are correlated here. The name-brand appeal is broad and consistent across geographies. There is a belief that the level of sophistication of the work is at its peak in Big Law (though it's not this simple, of course).

There is an assumption—sometimes accurate, sometimes not—that Mid Law rewards its people with enhanced work-life balance. Certainly, the pay—from associate up to equity—is not on the same scale. Instead, associates are often drawn to Mid Law because they believe they will get to play bigger roles on their matters—and get their hands dirty earlier and more often (in terms of having client contact/taking depositions/holding the pen). These draws are significant.

Let's Look at the Numbers

Since January, in California (as a snapshot), about 140 associates have moved from Big Law to firms that are outside the Am Law 200, according to data from Leopard Solutions. Forty-five partners made the same move—interestingly, largely litigators. For the reverse course, Mid Law to Big Law, there were 165 associates and almost 65 partners (again, mostly litigators).

There are market-specific reasons for some of this: In more unsettled macroeconomic conditions, it's not surprising that more associates were chasing money, and that some partners may have been shown the door from their Big Law firm if their books had shrunk, etc. But, it's proof of concept that there is a lot of movement between Big Law and Mid Law in all different kinds of macroeconomic climates.

So, what's the deal with lawyers who go from Big Law to Mid Law and back again, or vice versa?

The value propositions of Mid Law and Big Law are, to paint with a broad brush, diametrically opposed. While it's easy to understand the appeal of both, the transition between the two can be fraught.

A partner I am aware of had spent his entire (long!) career in Mid Law at a high prestige, full-service boutique and was a big fish in that pond. He had built a very credible book. In a moment when his practice was in extremely high demand, he was poached by a Big Law firm to take on an important global leadership role and launch an office. Hard to turn down? I can see that. But it's such a different context that I'd be shocked if there weren't significant growing pains. The way one practices in Big Law is wildly different, the expectations vary, and there goes your rate flexibility. For someone who was a boutique lifer, it's not just being in the deep end of your normal pool—it's the ocean.

For Mid Law firms, they can lose their rainmakers when the firm becomes a victim of that partner's success. This is especially true where a partner's practice area is hot in general or a major strategic priority for the Big Law firm. In that case, the amount of cash that can drop into that partners lap can feel life-changing. For Big Law firms, they can lose both established partners seeking to ramp down slightly as well as ambitious junior partners and associates who need a different platform to build their books. When I speak to senior associates at Big Law firms, one of their chief complaints is that they can bring in work, but it is either too small potatoes for the firm or their contacts can't justify Big Law rack rates.

Many Mid Law firms bristle at the idea that they are a work-life balance option, but billable requirements (and average hours billed) tend to be lower than in Big Law. At many Big Law firms without billable requirements (or those with expectations of 1,900-plus), the soft requirement is at least 2,200. At the majority of Mid Law firms, 2,200 is a number hit by a very small percentage of lawyers per year. The numbers don't lie. For time immemorial, this has been a massive draw for lawyers as their lives change. They are burning out, they have a child, they are on the other end of their career peak but aren't ready to close the door on practice. It should also be said, loudly, that a lot of Mid Law firms are extremely high prestige in their markets and are doing compelling, high-sophistication work. That can't be lost in the shuffle of this conversation.

You can see how these Big Law to Mid Law and Mid Law to Big Law moves happen. The initial reaction (surprise!) to these moves is often heightened versus a move from one Big Law firm to another or one Mid Law firm to another. But, it may also be easier to ultimately stomach for the firm losing the lawyer because they aren't going to a direct competitor. That can result in overflow or conflicts business coming their way, as it's a less abrupt or threatening move.

Ultimately, Big Law and Mid Law offer different experiences, requirements, prestige levels, cultures, flexibility levels, and pay. Each lawyer will make their own decision about the tradeoffs. What we can be sure of is that the dance will continue.