Big Law - No, It Doesn't Know What It's Doing in Hiring, Not with Entry-Level, Not with Star Partners

 The sticky story in Big Law has shifted. Abruptly.

Remember how it was about, including on "60 Minutes," the dealmaking with the Trump administration. Books like "Regime Change" and "Profiles in Cowardice" are still trying to run with that same-old.

But, the reality is that those who had been in the loop on that one, such as Paul, Weiss partner Brad Karp, essentially have returned to the normal work of being aggressive representatives for clients. For Karp those include Apollo, Citi and the NFL. The guy is doing great. So are the lawyers at the other eight law firms which negotiated the Executive Orders with the White House.

Now, the story, presented in urgent tones, is about hiring. That extends from entry level to those lateral star partners. In the front lines of this are legal journalists Roy Strom at Bloomberg Law and Sara Randazzo at Reuters Legal. 

Let's cut to the chase. The grabber is that the leaders making those hiring decisions are more or less are flying blind. 

For the entry level, Strom points out:

"Firms have no real answer to how quickly or how dramatically AI will impact their work. They don’t know how many lawyers they will need in three years, let alone 15."

Actually it was Karp in 2025 who projected that entry-level hiring would fall off. In an interview with Lawyer Monthly Karp indicated AI would reduce demand. It did: about 7.5%. Strom indicates more reduction is on the way.

As a result, succession is in play. There might not be enough hired and developed to fill the strategy slots which still need to be filled. In addition, there might not even be adequate manpower to get the work done that AI can't.

The avearge partner is 52 years old. Among the outliers are  Kirkland & Ellis - 42 - and Nixon Peabody - 47.63. Of course, many other sectors, which are also cutting back entry-level hiring, could also be saddled with an empty talent pipeline as well as a shortage of worker bees.

Now, what about those lateral star partners who are reported to be compensated with $20 million annually, at least for the time being.

Randazzo points out:

"Legal intelligence firm Decipher finds that 51% of new-partner hires leave within five ‌years, 64% ⁠fail to deliver their promised business and 36% never fully integrate. Decipher, which helps law firms vet lateral hires, also found that 40% of lateral partner candidates last year prompted [other] concerns ..."

In short, hey, so much for the fanfare when the poaching happens. There's a real possibiity that the hire might fail. How does this usually happen? 

Well, the lateral winds up not being able to transport a key account or as much of it as expected. Such might have happened with a partner who had handled the Apollo account at Paul, Weiss and lateraled to White & Case. There the partner only worked on one Apollo-related assignment and departed within 16 months. 

Another way they disappoint in terms of generating revenue is the failure to develop new business. They could be parachuted into the glutted Houston, Texas energy scene and not be able to get the practice off the ground.  

A third is that they can't master the internal politics. They are locked out from the critical resources. 

Of course, such mishiring is also common in other sectors. About 30% to 50% of executive hires fail.

The unknows associated with hiring in Big Law could result in a talent deficit, client churn, reduced financial performance, damaged branding and more. The leadership should be becoming humble about not-knowing.

In coaching I frequently introduce the Zen mantra: Clear Thinking, Don't Know.

BTW: I have been analyzing Paul, Weiss since 2019. 

Careers. Forget all that. It’s about earning a good living, no matter what.

Complimentary consultation with Jane Genova, StreetSmart Coaching (janegenova374@gmail.com)