Attorneys who join a firm laterally make partner faster than “homegrowns,” those who joined right after law school graduation, according to statistics followed by Leopard Solutions since 2012. That gap has been consistent and widening over the past decade. Why is it that laterals do better than home grown attorneys? We don’t know for sure but can suggest several reasons.
Change in hiring trends
Historically, most of law firm growth came through entry-level hiring. Over the years, however, lateral hiring has fast outpaced entry-level hiring as a major growth strategy. Big Law firms continue to lean more toward lateral associates than entry-level hires, doubling down on a trend that’s been taking shape for at least the last eight or so years, but this may change. From 2012 through 2017, law firms hired many more entry-level lawyers than laterals. However, for two consecutive years now (2023 and 2024), entry-level hires have outnumbered lateral hires among Top 200 firms, although that margin narrowed in 2024.
Therefore, as a residual effect in the recent past and for several more years into the future, there simply have been and will be more lateral associates than homegrowns at the partnership consideration level.
Hired for different skills
Different attributes are valued in lawyer candidates at different levels of seniority. The homegrowns, who joined their firms right out of law school, were hired for being top students and strong researchers and writers with an interest in the firm’s practice areas, and for demonstrating a willingness to put in long hours and meet deadlines. At that point, they were valued for being potentially good “worker bees”; therefore, they are somewhat generic and fungible. But they are unknown quantities. There’s no way to know if they will have what it takes when it comes time for partnership consideration in the future.
Lateral associates, on the other hand, are more proven quantities, and are hired to fill specific firm practice needs. At the mid-level lateral associate level, law firms look for a mix of skills and attributes going beyond the credentials. Key factors include a candidate’s deep expertise in specific practice areas that align with the firm’s long-term strategy, technological proficiency, a history of building and managing client relationships, cultural fit with the firm’s environment, and clear career goals. At the more senior levels, firms prioritize candidates who show potential for high-value client work and practice development. Lateral candidates closer to partnership consideration also must show that they can also be managers and business professionals, acting as owners of the firm. At that level of seniority, law firms often are looking for associates that model exceptional client service and have experience leading client teams, training, coaching, and mentoring junior attorneys, and strategizing on litigation matters and deals. In other words, a firm won’t hire a lateral candidate unless they’ve already demonstrated that they’ve got what it takes to succeed over time in the new environment.
Looking for a specific fit
On the flip side, by the time most associates are ready to consider making a lateral move, they are in a better position to choose a firm that is a long-term fit. They have a few years of practice under their belts. Their preferences and priorities may have changed since they interviewed for their first legal jobs while in law school or upon graduation. They have a clearer idea about what they like and don’t like about their particular practice areas, the types of clients and matters they handle, and where they want to go in their legal careers. Thus they will be much more discerning about the opportunities they seek.
Lateral candidates are more likely to ask questions about partnership track at their target firms, if that is important to them, and what it takes to get there. They will look for certain opportunities that will give them a better chance at achieving their career goals: exposure to clients and certain high-value work and more time working with a wider range of partners. Often, they will negotiate the timing of partnership consideration before accepting an offer.
Biases against homegrowns
Associates who started their legal careers at the firm may face biases and an assumption of complacency as opposed to the lateral hire, who is a “shiny new thing.” Homegrowns might have to battle a preconceived view of them as the untested young lawyers who knew nothing about law practice when they first joined the firm, and may have a difficult time getting that first impression out of the heads of the powers-that-be. No matter how much time has passed, they may never rise in the ranks solely because senior partners could not see them in the elevated role. With the prevalence of associate movement these days, those in the position to make partnership decisions may also think that, if those associates were any good, they would have been recruited away by now.
Laterals benefit from coming into the firm with a clean slate and the presumption of excellence, otherwise they would not have passed muster with the hiring committee. They also must work intentionally and proactively to integrate into a new firm environment. Homegrowns, who have been with the firm since law school summers or just after graduation, were ushered along with their classes and, possibly, are more complacent about affirmatively seeking growth opportunities and meeting lawyers across the firm outside their niches. This perceived attitude of inertia can be detrimental when it comes to garnering those partnership votes.
There also might be a lingering “Covid Effect.” Remote working and hybrid schedules could have negatively impacted homegrowns’ partnership chances. Laterals may have spent more time working in the office as they onboarded and integrated into their new firms, resulting in more valuable facetime with decision-making partners. The homegrowns working remotely unfortunately may have been “out of sight, out of mind,” missing out on making important connections and gaining the mentorship, practice development, client relationship opportunities, and stretch assignments necessary for elevation to partner.
More investment in laterals
A longtime big law firm talent recruitment and development professional reported that homegrowns associates often express frustration about their firms’ apparent disparate investment in the advancement of laterals via onboarding and integration efforts and training. It might be that those firms are seeking to reap the benefits of their time, effort, and financial investment in those lateral hires, often including the payment of hefty recruiter fees. Although the firms have been investing in their homegrown associates for a longer period of time, perhaps the faster rate of elevation of lateral hires to partner are an effort to see those recent investments pay off sooner rather than later.
