|
|
|
|
|
|
       |
|
 |  |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
 |
Results By State Firms R-W Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld Dallas (only Washington, D.C., office participated) Midlevel composite score: 3.10 Summer composite score: 4.40 Midlevel associates at the Washington, D.C., office of Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld expressed a lot of satisfaction with their work. "Big-name clients, big-name firm," wrote one. Many of the 16 respondents also reported a good working atmosphere and collegiality among associates, all helping to make Akin, Gump a firm that many would recommend to a friend just graduating from law school. (Akin, Gump's Dallas office declined to participate in either our midlevel or summer associate survey.) On the downside, many of the D.C. respondents groused about low compensation, and roughly half of the respondents wrote that the hard work and long hours-an average of 58.8 hours per week-were somewhat disruptive to their family and social lives. Few felt that the firm would necessarily be loyal to them in hard times. Some complained of poor treatment by the partners and a resultant high rate of attrition among the associates. "They claim they care but then treat us horribly," wrote one. "No partner is ever sanctioned for treating an associate like crap." All of these factors contributed to the firm's below-average finish of 128 among 160 offices nationwide and twenty-seventh of 34 firms based in or with offices in the capital. Akin, Gump had emergency on-site day care, for which some associates wrote that they were extremely grateful, and a small gym. Still, some D.C. associates complained the firm was "really cheap, and often about dumb things." D.C. summer associates ranked the firm eighty-third out of 184 overall nationally, but the firm received high marks for treatment of summer associates by partners (4.3, compared to a citywide average of 4.5) and full-time associates (4.5, compared to a citywide average of 4.6). Its score for training and guidance was 4.4, well above the citywide average of 4.1. One summer associate praised the firm as "laid-back, especially for a large firm." (Responses: 16M/32S) 
Allen & Overy
Allen & Overy's summer program is new and somewhat "undeveloped," according to one respondent, but it still received good marks and ranked thirty-second of 184 firms nationwide. Scores in every category except our question about whether respondents would accept an offer of full-time work were above average. Responses were solicited only from U.S. law students spending the summer at Allen & Overy offices in New York, London, and Hong Kong. Summer associates in the Hong Kong and London offices wrote that they liked the travel and international feel of the firm as well as the team work and entrepreneurial spirit, but many wanted to settle into a full-time associateship closer to home. (Responses: 13S)
Alston & Bird This firm rated seventh overall among midlevels, with high scores for treatment from partners and even higher scores for management openness about finances and strategies (fifth nationally) and knowledge of partnership prospects (fourth nationally). Responses about compensation and whether the kind of work midlevels were doing measures up to their expectations were also positive, but a shade more mixed. Some of the 28 respondents thought they might find greener pastures. Nineteen percent of the midlevel associates said they were actively looking for other jobs, but nearly all would recommend seeking a job at the firm to a friend. "This is a first-rate place to work," raved one. Another applauded the "institutional sense of humor." Among summer associates, the firm ranked eighty-third, just above average. Many appreciated the relaxed, yet professional, atmosphere, but the firm scored below average on the question measuring whether respondents would accept a full-time associate position. Some expressed concern about the firm's rapid rate of growth, and a few wrote that they would have appreciated more feedback. (Responses: 28M, 33S)
Altheimer & Gray A strong pro bono commitment, satisfactory compensation, and above-average treatment from partners are arguments for a career at Altheimer & Gray, according to 14 midlevel respondents. Most said they expected to be at the firm for at least two more years, and none said they were looking for new jobs. But life at the Chicago firm is not all a bed of roses, and its negatives pulled its score down to a below-average 109th place national ranking. Although midlevels reported feeling that partnership at the firm was a real possibility for them, some accused management of being overly secretive about the process of reaching it, as well as about finances. One wrote that "it's impossible to get a straight answer out of anyone" regarding associate bonuses, compensation, and what it takes to make partner. Many also said the firm was weak in the mentoring and training department, a category in which it ranked 146th nationally. Perks included a small on-site gym and 12 weeks of paid parental leave, although one respondent wrote that the firm needed on-site day care facilities as well. Summer associates were no more enthusiastic and gave the firm well-below-average marks, which landed it in the bottom quarter nationally. The training and feedback were particularly weak, they wrote, and the treatment by partners and associates below average. Still, some of the written comments from summer associates contained raves, and an above-average number of respondents said they'd accept an offer of full-time employment from the firm. (Responses: 14M, 27S)
Anderson Kill & Olick They wrote that were well treated by the partners and associates, but otherwise summer associates were fairly lukewarm about their experience at Anderson Kill & Olick. They ranked it in the bottom quarter of the firms surveyed overall. The lowest scores (3.7) were in the categories of interest level of work and training and guidance. In written comments, several respondents said the summer program lacked structure, and that summer associates were made to feel like a low priority. (Responses: 7S)
Andrews & Kurth Judging from the responses of eight midlevel associates, Andrews & Kurth is a delightful place to work, ranking fourth nationwide among midlevels. Great treatment from partners, a wonderful work atmosphere, and interesting work all contributed to the raves the firm received. "It's a big-firm practice with a small-firm atmosphere," wrote one. "All of the attorneys are on a first-name basis (even the most senior partners.)" If there was a downside to the friendly, first-name atmosphere of the firm, said two respondents, it was that at times, the place bordered on being a little too informal and disorganized. "Sometimes the lack of structure can be frustrating," wrote one respondent. Another suggested that the firm should more aggressively develop new practice areas, such as Internet law. Still, these minuses had nobody looking for another job, and most expected to still be at the firm in two years. A part-time track for women who have children and want to cut back working hours was described as helpful. In the summer program, many wrote that they admired the relationships among the attorneys, and all said they would take a job if offered. Some, however, gave low marks to the interest level of the work and criticized the firm's technology, calling it behind the times. Overall, the firm placed an above-average sixtieth of 184 firms nationally. (Responses: 8M, 13S)
Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn Relatively reasonable hours and a "kinder, gentler" attitude earned Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn a midlevel composite score that placed it in fifteenth place nationally, far above average. "It is the best of both worlds," wrote one of the ten midlevels who responded. "A top-notch national law firm with a culture that prizes the person." The firm ranked ninth nationally in the category of atmosphere, and fourteenth on whether associates expect to remain at the firm for at least another two years. If there was one major weakness at a firm where everyone said they had a mentor, it is that midlevels are left somewhat in the dark about the partnership track and their chances of making partner. While the firm's higher-ups may not communicate much about specific partnership information, Arent Fox earned high marks for openness about finances and strategy, finishing in the top ten nationally. One wrote that the firm's open-door culture had a slight disadvantage: "It's so democratic that big change (like expansion) is hard to accomplish." Summer associates gave the firm scores that were somewhat below national averages, but their comments were favorable, by and large. They appreciated the relaxed atmosphere and what one called the "serious commitment to pro bono [and] community." Two lauded the firm for giving them diverse assignments. (Responses: 10M, 9S)
Arnall Golden & Gregory The fifth-highest marks in the midlevel survey for workplace atmosphere propelled Arnall Golden & Gregory to eleventh place nationally. More than half of the seven midlevel respondents commented on the firm's "nice" or "pleasant" environment, with one respondent characterizing the firm as "truly outstanding," due in part to its "low-pressure environment." Responding midlevels expressed satisfaction with their compensation, and thought the firm would be loyal to them in hard times. Few respondents thought the hours-a 51.1-hour average workweek, well below the national average-were overly stressful. Midlevel associates also seemed pleased that the partnership track at Arnall Golden was fairly clear. "I am confident that if I do good job, I will make partner," wrote one. Most respondents planned on staying beyond two years, despite the fact that the work was rated less interesting than at most firms. Summer associates were pretty enthused as well, rating the firm twenty-third overall and first in Atlanta. They gave the firm fourth-place marks for how interesting the work was, and felt exceptionally well treated by partners and associates alike. "The attorneys at AG&G were great to work with and made me feel right at home from day one," wrote one happy camper. (Responses: 7M, 12S)
Arnold & Porter This firm is known for its emphasis on pro bono work, and it failed to disappoint: Midlevels gave it a score of 4.0, up from last year's 3.3, to finish first place nationally in that category. Although the average midlevel workweek at the firm was 55.8 hours, shorter than the national average of 57.1, midlevels attributed a high attrition rate at the firm to "daunting hours" and "mind-numbing" work. The 23 responding midlevels also reported knowing little about their chances of making partner. Still, the casual atmosphere at the prestigious firm was applauded, and five midlevels expressed admiration for the firm's managing partner. Midlevels gave the firm high marks for management openness. One midlevel also praised the firm's associate compensation structure; others praised the on-site day care center, which was described as "very popular" and "wonderful." Summer associates gave the firm above-average marks across the board, particularly for treatment by full-time associates. Comments contained raves about the "cultural, liberal, pro bono-oriented, relaxed, smart" culture at the firm. Some were frustrated with the one-project-at-a-time work assignment structure, and the lack of projects for summer associates. Some also were also put off by the firm's large size. (Responses: 23M, 27S)
Arter & Hadden
Some summer associates thought the atmosphere at Arter & Hadden's Cleveland office a bit stuffy, although they appreciated the fact that the firm does not seem to expect its associates to work overly long hours. The firm was ranked below average in general by the 12 responding summer associates. In the categories of interest level of the work, and treatment from partners, it was in the bottom quarter. Respondents who spent their summer in the firm's Los Angeles office were more enthusiastic about both the atmosphere and the location, although one said he could have used more feedback. (Responses: 12S)
Baker & Botts Midlevels at five Baker & Botts offices-Austin, Dallas, Houston, New York, and Washington, D.C.-were surveyed this year. Respondents in all five cities praised the firm for giving them interesting work and a high degree of responsibility; criticism focused on (in the words of one respondent) a sometimes overly "conservative atmosphere and approach." The combined midlevel score for the five offices landed Baker & Botts a ranking of fifty-seventh place nationally. Interesting work and a friendly atmosphere that included respectful treatment by partners were largely responsible for that score. "I think this is the absolute best place to begin a career in corporate law," gushed one Houston midlevel. Among the four Houston-based firms surveyed, Baker & Botts ranked second. In the New York office, midlevels generally praised the atmosphere and found the work interesting, but some said the firm could use a more formal mentorship program. In D.C., one midlevel complained that the firm had no casual Friday dress policy and was "extremely conservative." But a colleague lauded the firm for giving associates an opportunity for "substantive responsibility early on" and for not overstaffing projects. Similarly, an Austin midlevel mentioned the firm's "rigidity" but appreciated the fact that capable associates receive "a high degree of autonomy [and can] take credit for their work." In Dallas, some respondents lamented management's lack of openness about finances and partnership, but another cited the firm's "high-quality work and high-quality lawyers." Midlevels in all five offices said they were fairly uncertain about their partnership chances. The firm has a "special counsel" position for senior associates who do not make partner, a career option that three respondents cited favorably. Summer associates were generally less enamored of the place. Some called it too big, bureaucratic, stiff, and stuffy, and lacking in camaraderie. "Everyone seems to take themselves too seriously," wrote one who spent the summer in the Houston headquarters. But others perceived the firm as a meritocracy that rewards hard work and dedication. The Dallas respondents seemed to have had the best summer of all: They were the only ones who gave the firm a composite score that was above the national average. (Responses: 42M, 67S)
Baker & Daniels The atmosphere and work received high scores from the seven responding midlevels at Baker & Daniels, with one associate reporting feeling fully supported in an effort to carve out a new practice area. Associates described the firm as family-friendly, with a part-time partnership track and a lower-than-average workweek. Likewise, summer associates noted that Baker & Daniels's attorneys didn't seem to be as overworked as they were at other firms. "The office clears out at around 5:30 or 6," wrote one. Such quality of life pluses helped the firm score twenty-eighth nationally on our question measuring whether summer associates would accept full-time offers. The weak point for the summer associates was in their treatment by the firm's associates, a category in which the firm ranked 127th nationally. (Responses: 7M, 11S)
Baker & McKenzie Midlevel associates are working some long hours at Baker & McKenzie's offices around the world-an average of 57.5 hours per week, they say. But 13 of the 14 respondents said they are happy with their compensation, and most said they have a clear idea of their partnership chances; the firm ranked twenty-ninth nationally on that question. Those factors, and the firm's higher-than-average score on our question measuring the interest level of the work, boosted Baker & McKenzie to an above-average composite score. But the premium that the firm placed on billables was mentioned as a factor in associate attrition. The home office in Chicago received only average marks for atmosphere. The long hours and "pressure to develop business at an early career stage" were cited as reasons, as well as "in-fighting [among] partners." Although the Chicago office has instituted emergency day care facilities, a midlevel there nonetheless lamented the "lack of any examples of women with children remaining at the firm." Summer associates prized the international work and atmosphere at the firm, and they ranked Baker & McKenzie seventh nationally in the area of training. But many were apparently planning to take that training elsewhere: The firm ranked 172nd of 184 nationally on our question measuring whether respondents would accept an offer of full-time employment from the firm. The most frequent complaints were that the firm had too little diversity, that its technology was outdated, and that it was too compartmentalized. (Responses: 14M, 23S)
Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll Ballard Spahr landed just above the national average, and seventh out of 11 firms surveyed in Philadelphia. One of the 14 respondents praised the "sophistication of the legal work" while another lauded the "exciting, cutting-edge" practice and the "terrific pro bono program." Still, half complained that their jobs were so stressful that it adversely affected their health and the quality of their lives. "The work ethic is just a little too demanding," wrote one. "Another criticized "the firm's lack of interest as to concerns, happiness and training of associates." The firm's summer program got good marks, ranking thirteenth nationally, and landing in the top ten for atmosphere. Wrote one respondent: "Ballard offers a rare combination of genuine collegiality, invaluable mentoring, concerted strides towards diversity, [and] sophisticated practice." (Responses: 14M, 10S)
Barnes & Thornburg Midlevels at Barnes & Thornburg describe the work and the people as interesting. The firm ranked fifth on whether respondents expect to be there for at least two more years. All six respondents reported that they were doing the kind of work they envisioned in law school, and said they would recommend Barnes & Thornburg to a newly graduated friend. And yet the hard work and stress were said to be affecting the health of half of the six respondents. "I'm overworked and underpaid," complained one. A few also wrote that mentoring and guidance were lacking. The firm's summer associates were eager to sign on with the firm, ranking the firm seventh on our question measuring whether they would accept an offer of full-time work. Still, they indicated that the firm needs to do more in order to retain good associates, especially women lawyers. (Responses: 6M, 7S)
Bell, Boyd & Lloyd When it comes to atmosphere and treatment by partners, summer associates at Bell, Boyd & Lloyd report that the firm could hardly be better. They ranked it in the top 15 nationally in these two categories, describing the atmosphere as relaxed and friendly. Several wrote appreciatively about the firm's "honesty" about the kinds of work associates are assigned. The weak point was feedback. Summer associates said they were told they were doing well, but they wanted more precise and organized evaluations. (Responses: 17S)
Bingham Dana Ranked tenth among midlevels nationally, Bingham Dana is no "stodgy old banking firm," wrote one enthusiastic midlevel. "If anyone really researched it, they would find that it is a very young, vibrant, diverse group of individuals . . . in very diverse practice areas." Such endorsements were par for the course. One wrote, succinctly: "I like this firm-it is the profession I have concerns about." The camaraderie of the firm was also praised, and the firm ranked ninth nationally for atmosphere. "This is definitely a work-hard, play-hard bunch," wrote one. Contributing to the positive atmosphere, said many, were the firm's "casual summer" dress policy, on-site child care, and subsidies for gym memberships, home computers, and transportation. Similar raves were heard from the summer associates, who thought the summer program was far above average. Most wrote that they were eager for offers of full-time status at the firm. "You are really used as a lawyer," wrote one. "Great experience. Fabulous resources." (Responses: 22M, 27S)
Blank Rome Comisky & McCauley The five responding midlevels reported working an average of 59.3 hours per week at this Philadelphia firm, a workweek that rivals those in some of the New York firms. They also decried the heavy emphasis on billable hours, a category in which Blank Rome Comisky ranked 153rd. Still, all the midlevel respondents were happy with their pay and would recommend working there to a job-hunting friend. Perks included an on-site gym and inexpensive lunches. But one midlevel complained about a lack of openness on the part of the firm's management about policies and career advancement. Another groused, "I think they should double the price of the lunches and make them twice as good." But the summer associates were downright enthusiastic about Blank Rome, ranking the firm third nationally and first in Philadelphia. They gave a perfect score for treatment by partners, and most respondents wrote that they felt confident about getting and accepting offers of full-time status. Wrote one: "There are some truly zany personalities at BRCM. Working here is never dull." (Responses: 5M, 23S)
Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison "Loosen up" is what one midlevel respondent wrote that he wished he could tell Brobeck's management. The San Francisco firm is far from California casual when it comes to the length of the workweek-60.6 hours, according to the survey-and emphasis on billable hours."I can get by on less than $104K," wrote one of the 16 respondents. "I can't get by not seeing my family." Balancing what some midlevels termed an extreme bottom-line focus were a casual dress policy, up-to-date technology, and the fact that some of those long hours could be spent with laptops at home. Respondents appreciated the amount of responsibility and opportunities they got early on, and wrote that they enjoyed the work. But they complained that they were not treated well by higher-ups. "For all the touchy-feely talk, management really does not care about associates," one respondent wrote. Above-average scores from summer associates in most categories placed Brobeck in the top one-third of firms surveyed. They were excited about the clients and the cutting-edge work, which included lots of Internet IPOs, and loved the year-round business casual dress policy. Concerns included the long hours and the perceived instability of the high-tech industry that makes up much of Brobeck's client base. (Responses: 16M, 40S)
Brown & Bain The eight responding summer associates at Brown & Bain praised the atmosphere and caliber of the firm's attorneys. But dull assignments placed the firm 155th for interest level of work. "Young associates don't get the same practical experience that their peers at smaller firms would get," wrote one. Some also said they could have used more feedback. (Responses: 8S)
Brown, Rudnick, Freed & Gesmer Placing twenty-fifth among midlevels, Brown, Rudnick, Freed & Gesmer rated some of the highest scores in the nation for treatment by partners and work atmosphere. "The firm is an enjoyable place to work and treats its associates very well," wrote one of the eight midlevel respondents. The management of the firm came in for a fair amount of praise. One particularly attractive perk was the firm's "slow track" to partnership, allowing some to work three days a week. "It's the reason I'm still here," wrote one respondent. But 50 percent said they were not doing the work they envisioned in law school, the firm ranked a low 137th in terms of how interesting the work is, and one respondent grumbled about the location and pay. The firm's summer associates claimed they had the country's longest average workweek-55.8 hours. One respondent claimed to have billed "a zillion hours" and to have spent the night working at the office four times. In addition, they said that they did not receive enough feedback. Wrote one respondent: "The firm has done excellent work to articulate its vision and what it expects from its [full-time] associates. Do the same for the summer program." (Responses: 8M, 13S)
Brown & Wood Midlevels praised this New York firm as laid-back, even in its attitude towards billable hours, a category in which it ranked fourteenth nationally. "The firm is civil, and people are respectful both of family obligations and standards of decent and ethical practice of law," one of the eight midlevel respondents wrote. The firm also received high scores for atmosphere, ranking fourteenth nationally, and treatment from partners, ranking ninth nationally. Here's the downside: Below-average work-interest level, a category in which the firm finished in 101st place nationally. Respondents wrote that management was secretive about finances and strategies, and many found the partnership path murky. Fifty percent reported anxiety about the future. (These midlevels were surveyed about two months after the collapse of merger talks between Brown & Wood and White & Case.) The firm's "cheapness" was a frequent lament among the summer associates, who complained that pay, perks, and parties were substandard. Overall, they ranked the firm's summer program 152nd nationally. (Responses: 8M, 17S)
Bryan Cave Midlevels perceived Bryan Cave as prestigious and describe the practice as "cutting-edge." They also reported feeling well-treated by management, who were described as "friendly" by one respondent and "gracious" by another. Most of the 16 respondents found the work interesting-more than half described it as being on a par with their law school ideal. The firm scored well on our question measuring how much respondents know about their chances of making partner. But midlevels complained that the firm placed too much emphasis on billables, and 56 percent of respondents said that the stress of their jobs was adversely affecting their health. Although the firm has instituted a part-time partnership track, it did not receive rave reviews. "They claim that flextime and part-time are available, but I have not seen anyone take advantage of it," one midlevel wrote. "I've heard that to do so would be partnership suicide." The summer program received below-average ratings. Summer associates wrote that they appreciated the friendliness of the firm's attorneys but criticized the organization of the firm's summer program. Some respondents said that the firm needed to strike a better balance between work and social events; others urged it to drop its mock trial program. (Responses: 16M, 25S)
Buchanan Ingersoll An atmosphere that one midlevel described as "not stuffy" and an unusual degree of management openness about finances and strategy landed Buchanan Ingersoll forty-fourth in the nation among midlevels surveyed. Eight of the ten respondents said they were happy with their salary, and none reported they were searching for a new job. Treatment by the partners was a bit more spotty, ranking 150th nationally, and midlevels said the firm placed too much emphasis on billables. One wrote that his least favorite aspect of the firm was "the several partners who can't understand that, unlike them, my goal in life is not to work all the time." Summer associates reported feeling well treated by both partners and full-time associates. Overall, they called the summer program well run, and gave the firm above-average scores in most categories. Some of those who indicated that they'd decline an offer said they'd prefer a smaller firm. One worried about the social conformity, and another disliked the windowless offices for associates. (Responses: 10M, 19S)
Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft The 20 responding midlevels at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft were a pretty unhappy bunch, complaining about "a complete lack of training and guidance" and management "greed." One respondent described the atmosphere at the firm as "sarcastic and nasty." All the negatives combined to put the firm second to last in the national rankings among midlevels. Perks at the firm included a subsidized gym membership, a shoeshine person who visited the offices, sabbaticals, and emergency child care service. Although midlevels reported that Cadwalader offers nontraditional career paths, few respondents said they would take advantage of them. "You're either a partner or you're not," wrote one midlevel. Cadwalader fared no better among its summer associates, who ranked it near the bottom as well. But they tended to feel more poorly treated by the associates than by the partners, and many picked up on the overall negative environment and low morale. Several of the summer associates said that the full-time associates appeared unhappy. (Responses: 20M, 33S)
Cahill Gordon & Reindel Cahill Gordon responded to its poor evaluation among midlevels last year by implementing a mentoring program and emergency child care, all with good effect: The firm's scores were up this year, although it still ranked below the national average of 3.28. The low score from the 30 respondents came despite the feeling that work at the firm, especially First Amendment and media work, was both challenging and interesting, and that associates were given substantial responsibility. In addition, the firm received an outstanding score-sixth in the country for its low key attitude toward billable hours. Respondents said they craved more training, guidance and structure, as well as more openness by management regarding partnership and policies. "There's a tremendous social gap between partners and associates," wrote one midlevel, "and [there is] the feeling that partners don't really care about developing associates' legal skills because they know you won't be around for more than a few years." Summer associates liked the easy-going structure of the summer program (the phrase "laid-back" appeared in many of their written comments) although they gave it below-average ratings in most areas. While some liked the flexibility and freedom of it, others said they did not get the training they had hoped for. The program, wrote one respondent, is "great for self-starters." (Responses: 30M, 36S)
Calfee, Halter & Griswold Apart from some grumbling about compensation and what one termed the "opacity about my partnership chances," the 14 responding midlevel associates reported that life at this firm is pretty good, and it finished with a composite score that was above the national average. Most respondents applauded their treatment by partners, the work environment, and the level of responsibility they were given. Particularly popular is the firm's policy of offering free gym memberships to associates of at least two years' tenure. But dissatisfaction with compensation was a consistent sour note-42 percent were dissatisfied with their pay. "We should be a salary leader in this market," one said he wanted to tell the managing partner. "High compensation would attract more associates and aid the firm in the long run." The training could have been better, said summer associates, who were not so sure they'd accept a full-time offer from the firm. Some described it as too "provincial," and said that they did not want to settle in Cleveland. But they appreciated the fact that the firm was not a sweatshop, and they noted that full-time associates seemed reasonably happy. (Responses: 14M, 14S)
Carlton, Fields, Ward, Emmanuel, Smith & Cutler Carlton Fields stood out for its partners' good treatment of associates and mentoring. The Florida firm was somewhat weaker, however, when it came to the level of interest of the work and, especially, compensation: Ten of the 15 respondents said they weren't happy with their pay. However, the firm had a shorter-than-average workweek, 52 hours. "You can be out of here by 6 p.m.," one midlevel wrote. Another characterized the firm as a little too laid-back and said it needed to "focus on getting large clients," which would allow it to increase salaries, raise the firm's profile, and improve the interest level of the work. Summer associates described the atmosphere as warm (and they weren't talking about Florida summer weather). "I knew this was the firm for me when on my first day of work I was greeted in the conference room by a dozen associates and partners," wrote one. "It was a very comforting experience." Some said they'd be willing to make the trade-off in salary in order to work the firm's reasonable hours. (Responses: 15M, 9S)
Chadbourne & Parke Midlevels at Chadbourne & Parke had harsh words for the firm's management, calling it secretive about finances and strategy and saying that it keeps associates in the dark about their partnership chances. Partners do not "really listen to the concerns of associates [or] address issues head-on," wrote one. Almost half of the nine responding midlevels said the stress of the job, which has an average workweek of 60.6 hours, was affecting their health, even with the perk of a gym membership. Three said they would not recommend working at the firm to a newly graduating friend. Summer associates picked up on the fact that the communication between partners and associates needed improvement, but they thought their program was well run. Their comments about their experiences at the firm were nearly uniformly favorable. (Responses: 9M, 12S)
Chapman and Cutler Chapman and Cutler's composite score among midlevels dropped below the national average this year. A few of the eight respondents shared the sentiments of one who lamented that the firm is "conservative, stodgy, and cheap." Not one took the effort to mention any special perks or alternative career tracks at the firm. Other reasons for dissatisfaction included perceived management secrecy about the business of the firm and lack of clarity about partnership chances. Half of the eight respondents said they were anxious about the future, and an equal number said that the stress of their jobs was affecting their health. Five said they were not doing the kind of worked they envisioned in law school. The one silver lining in the cloud was that the workweek was considered reasonable, an average of 54.1 hours, a good three hours below the national midlevel average. Summer associates had a sunnier outlook, as summer associates tend to, but they still ranked the firm below average overall. "The work is interesting, yet not overly intense," one wrote. Technology was a common source of complaints: Nationally, the firm ranked near the bottom in the category of satisfaction with technology. (Responses: 8M, 12S)
Choate, Hall & Stewart Choate, Hall & Stuart's reputation for collegiality was not misplaced, said the 17 responding midlevels. The Boston firm pulled up to seventeenth from thirty-eighth in the national rankings this year with particularly strong showings in the categories of treatment by partners, atmosphere, and training and guidance. Wrote one: "I have almost always been treated as a colleague whose input is valued and whose independent point of view is desired, and never as a drone." Summer associates also praised the firm and gave it much-higher-than-average overall scores to earn a seventeenth place ranking nationally. Among Boston firms, it was fourth of 14. Their treatment by both partners and associates bordered on exceptional, summer clerks said, putting both in seventh place nationally. Although the dress code and mandatory attendance at social events put off a few respondents, the biggest reservation was that it seemed tough to make partner at the firm. Still, most respondents said they were eager to receive a full-time offer from the firm. (Responses: 17M, 26S)
Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton Midlevels said that Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton-which received a well-below-average score from midlevels last year-has moved to shore up morale by making more concerted efforts at mentoring and considering development of nontraditional partnership tracks. Still, long hours, unpredictability of workload, and stress and burnout were the sources of plenty of griping. "Piling work on until I have a breakdown (emotional, health, spiritual, or otherwise) is just DUMB," wrote one of the 42 respondents. (The firm's average workweek of 59.9 hours was about average among New York firms.) Another source of dissatisfaction among midlevels was what is perceived to be haphazard assignment structure that several respondents said leaves the door open for favoritism. "Some people fall through the cracks," one respondent wrote. "Some people just get hosed." On the other hand, respondents agreed that the firm paid them fairly: Eighty-eight percent said they were satisfied with their compensation. Midlevels lauded the firm's no-pressure attitude toward billables-the firm ranked seventh nationally on that question-and several respondents praised the firm for giving them interesting work that receives international exposure. Summer associates agreed, giving the firm high marks in the "interesting work" category and saying they would probably accept a full-time offer from the firm. Still, one summer associate noted that "everyone is overworked," and another wrote, "If you want a fun summer program, this isn't the place to come." The firm was ranked close to the bottom of the firms surveyed on the quality of training. (Responses: 42M, 57S)
Cooley Godward Both summer and midlevel associates ranked Cooley Godward securely in the top quarter of all firms surveyed. The 11 midlevel respondents put it in the top thirty nationally in the areas of treatment from partners and the interest level of the work, and all but one said they were were happy with their pay. But there could be trouble around the corner: A few midlevels wrote of plummeting morale and described management as unsure of the reasons. "Cooley is beginning to come in line with every other large firm and [their] problems," wrote one respondent. Summer associates praised the recruitment, the people, and the diversity of the work, especially the high-tech work. "The people are smart, hip and well rounded," wrote one. But some respondents said they were concerned about a perceived shift in the culture of the firm toward a more bottom-line mentality, and heavy workloads for associates. "There aren't enough lawyers to handle all the work," wrote one. "We're turning away work in droves." (Responses: 11M, 49S)
Coudert Brothers Summer associates and their midlevel counterparts agreed: Life at Coudert Brothers was below average. Well below. The nine midlevel respondents cite a lack of training and a subpar atmosphere. Most reported being in the dark about partnership chances as well. Dissatisfaction was such that about half of the respondents wrote that they were actively looking for new jobs, the same percentage that reported being dissatisfied with their compensation. Still, more than half said they would recommend the firm to a friend with a new law degree. Summer associates cited a lack of feedback and organization. Some felt downright ignored. But many loved the international practice of the firm and the sophistication of the work. And despite below-average marks in every other category, the firm ranked fourteenth nationally on our question measuring whether summer program participants would accept full-time offers. (Responses: 9M, 20S)
Covington & Burling Covington & Burling has the second most highly rated summer program in the survey this year. Summer associates praised both the culture of the firm and the summer program itself. "I like the focus on excellence and the apparent lack of greed among the partners," wrote one. "The whole firm is oriented toward values of fairness, quality, and civility." Many respondents were hard-pressed to come up with something they didn't like about their experience at the firm. Wrote one, weakly: "The fact that everyone always seems to be so busy that they don't appreciate what a great place this is." Midlevel associates were not as ecstatic, but still gave their firm above-average marks. "Challenging, work, great instruction, [and] emphasis not solely on hours," wrote one. "The firm's lawyers are stellar and produce first-rate work product," wrote another. But the atmosphere didn't appeal to everyone. "The culture is a bit older, and a bit academic," wrote one of the ten respondents. Although they liked the emphasis on pro bono, some disliked the fact that pro bono work does not count toward the billable hours benchmark. (Responses: 10M, 38S)
Cozen and O'Connor You can't please everyone. Midlevels at Cozen and O'Connor gave their firm stellar marks and a fifth place ranking overall. Summer associates were pretty unimpressed, ranking it ninety-sixth. For midlevels, it was hard to beat the training (the firm finished in second place nationally), or the knowledge of one's partnership chances (it ranked fourth). Not one of the six respondents complained about the salary, and the firm finished fifth nationally on the question of whether respondents planned to stay at least two more years. Respondents said that the existence of junior and part-time partners eliminated the pressure of an "up-or-out" partnership track. "If you do good work and contribute to your practice group, that's what counts," wrote one. But summer associates bemoaned the workload and one wrote that the program was a little "too realistic." Despite some favorable comments about the relaxed atmosphere, they gave the firm a below-average score on the offer-acceptance question. (Responses: 6M, 11S)
Cravath, Swaine & Moore Not surprisingly, midlevel associates at Cravath, Swaine & Moore said they appreciated the prestige of the firm, the stature of the clients, and the caliber of both the partners and fellow associates. All of the 23 respondents said they'd recommend working at the firm to a recently graduating friend. But these pluses only partly made up for the fact that midlevels found their partnership prospects difficult to decipher and rated the management of Cravath among the most tight-lipped in the nation. Cravath's average workweek of 68 hours was the nation's second longest, and the hours were a primary source of unhappiness among midlevels. The lower than average emphasis on billables did not quite counteract those long hours: Thirty percent of the respondents said they were dissatisfied with their compensation. "Pay me more," several fantasized saying to the managing partner. Cravath's wasn't the most highly rated summer program: The hours and apparent unhappiness of the full-time associates were cited as negatives. Several said the computer system was poor and a few accused the firm of being cheap. But many summer associates naturally appreciated the firm's reputation and found the attorneys interesting. (Responses: 23M, 59S)
Crowell & Moring Midlevels were less than delighted at Crowell & Moring, which ranked in the bottom third nationally. Reasons cited by the 20 midlevel respondents included "the banality of some of the assignments," the "lack of training," and the firm's "bureaucracy." The lack of perks did not help. "They are behind the times on benefits," wrote one respondent. Other negatives included the perception that the firm valued billable hours too highly and that management is not open about finances and partnership chances. Fifteen percent of respondents said they were looking for new jobs, and 53 percent said that their work fell short of their law school ideal. Midlevels did appreciate the firm's informal atmosphere, and said they were not mistreated by the partners. The problem was that some felt ignored. "It is very easy for an associate to work here many years yet remain unknown to most partners," wrote one. Summer associates ranked the firm near the bottom on our question asking if they'd accept a full-time offer. Their concerns were that the firm was growing too large and the workload too heavy. Still, many raved about both the summer program and the firm, and one respondent noted that summer associates are treated better than full-time associates. Another wrote that the firm "maintains a high quality of work without sacrificing atmosphere and personality. And conscience." (Responses: 20M, 23S)
Cummings & Lockwood The management at Cummings & Lockwood was more open than those at most firms, and midlevels there had a better-than-average sense of their partnership chances, but those are the only categories in which Cummings & Lockwood received an above-average score from the 11 midlevel respondents. In fact, in most other categories, the firm did not break into the top 100. Nearly half of the respondents said they were actively looking for new jobs, the same percentage that expressed dissatisfaction with their compensation. Four said they'd steer a job-hunting friend away. None were counting on any loyalty from the firm either. Respondents uniformly said the firm would not stick by them in hard times. Complained one: "The firm's 'associates are fungible' attitude does not engender feelings of loyalty or motivation." (Responses: 11M)
Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle The midlevel and summer associates who completed our survey agreed: Working at Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle is fairly bleak, and the primary reason was compensation. All eight said they were dissatisfied with their pay, and scores were dismal in the categories of treatment by partners, training, and atmosphere. As a result, the firm ended up last in the national rankings. In fact, the only category in which the firm topped the ranking of 150th was in its attitude towards pro bono work (where it finished a respectable forty-ninth). Summer associates had a few good things to say about the firm's diversity and international focus. But two said it was cheap and one found the partners inaccessible; it finished near the bottom in our national summer associate rankings. (Responses: 8M, 6S)
Davis Polk & Wardwell Midlevels at this large New York firm called it civil and collegial and gave it generally high marks in the areas of atmosphere, support for pro bono work, and attitude toward billable hours. And the average reported workweek, 60.3 hours, was a bit lower than last year's 63. But some of the 25 responding midlevels found partners indifferent, and training and mentoring was said to be sorely lacking. "Don't ask questions," one respondent wrote, "lest you be dubbed an idiot." Sixty-three percent of the respondents said they lacked a mentor at Davis Polk. Part of the problem, one said, is that the firm is just too big. "It's the anonymity that I hate the most," wrote this same associate. Other midlevels complained that the firm offered no special benefits to associates. Wrote one: "They want you to work. Period." Summer associates also had some complaints about the work, like the lack of in-court or deposition experience for associates, but they were impressed with both the firm (a "powerhouse of intelligence," wrote one) and the summer program ("extremely well run," wrote another). But others called the firm "oppressive" or "passive-aggressive" and had a habit of "tooting its own horn." (Responses: 25M, 45S)
Davis Wright Tremaine Outstanding marks for atmosphere and management openness helped Davis Wright climb to a ranking of third in the nation among midlevels from last year's nineteenth-place finish. Midlevels reported having input on decisions regarding their own salary increases and bonuses and a pretty good idea of what their partnership chances are. That paid off in loyalty: None of the 11 respondents said they were looking for work elsewhere, and the firm ranked first in the nation on our question measuring whether associates plan to stay at the firm another two years. All respondents said they would recommend the firm to a recently graduated friend. The dark spot was compensation: Nearly half the respondents said they dissatisfied with their pay. Summer associates also loved the atmosphere, and the firm finished in fourteenth place nationally in that category. "The firm culture is so supportive and open," exclaimed one. Arguments in favor of accepting a full-time offer, one said, included the fact that first-year associates were allowed to float among practice areas until they find the right one for them. Diversity was an area several said needed improvement. The firm placed in the top quarter in the summer associates survey overall. (Responses: 11M, 11S)
Day, Berry & Howard Midlevels praised Day, Berry & Howard's commitment to pro bono work, but some said that work from the firm's paying clients tends to be dull and that the firm pays too little attention to developing the legal skills of associates. Unusually low scores on the topics of management openness and deciphering partnership prospects pulled the firm's composite scores down to well below average. Nearly half were unhappy with their compensation, and two of our 13 respondents said they were actively looking for new jobs. Close to half expected to be working somewhere else in two years, and the same number expressed anxiety about their future. The summer associates gave the firm a composite score just slightly below the national average. "The atmosphere is more relaxed than at a New York law firm," wrote one satisfied person, adding, "The partners and associates are willing to help summers." But one summer associate described Day, Berry as a bit stuffy and impersonal, and some found the work boring. The firm ended up in the bottom ten for the level of interest of the work. (Responses: 13M, 11S)
Debevoise & Plimpton Reviews of life at Debevoise & Plimpton were mixed among midlevels, but the firm emerged with an above-average score. Strong points included the high standards, caliber of the work, and humane atmosphere; the firm ranked twenty-fifth nationally in the area of treatment from partners, and one respondent described the partners as "brilliant lawyers." Accommodations for working parents, such as part-time work, were cited as enhancing the quality of life. But some of the 21 responding associates complained that there was too much management secrecy about finances and strategies, and the firm received average scores for training and guidance. Still the firm fared better than many other New York-based firms, finishing eighth out of 48, and the average workweek-56.6 hours-was low for that market, and even below the national average. Scores among summer associates at Debevoise never broke out of the bottom half in the survey. Respondents said they liked the relaxed and fairly quiet atmosphere of the place (although several felt it was too quiet and staid), and the fact that lawyers at the firm seemed to have a social conscience. But, as did the midlevels, they lamented the poor technology and lack of feedback. One said the summer class was too big, some thought the program was disorganized, and two actually complained that the firm spent too lavishly on its summer associates. (Responses: 21M, 41S)
Dechert Price & Rhoads Midlevels at Dechert Price & Rhoads generally praised the caliber of work the firm does, the friendliness of its lawyers, and their levels of compensation. The firm also got above-average scores from the 34 midlevel repsondents in the area of management openness about firm finances and strategies, but below-average marks on the clarity of one's chances of making partner. Specific complaints were hard to come by. Several respondents grumbled about hours, but conceded that the workload problem is not unique to the firm. One midlevel complained about being "pigeonholed into certain areas of law." Another complained that the firm was not very social. One complained that the firm had a "star" system and was overly concerned with grades and elite schools in hiring. And 70 percent of respondents said they doubted that the firm would be loyal to them in hard economic times. Summer associates liked the work and the training, but a few were less enamored with the atmosphere at the firm, saying it could be somewhat impersonal and unsocial. "I think credentials and academics are favored over interesting people and as a result, it's a bit stiff, a bit of a nerd factory," wrote one respondent. Overall, they thought the summer program was well coordinated, but a few said the summer class needed to spend more time together as a group to foster camaraderie. (Responses: 34M, 16S)
Dewey Ballantine Management came in for some criticism at Dewey Ballantine, which received low scores from ten responding midlevels for openness and clarity of partnership chances. One New York midlevel described the atmosphere as "stuffy." Decent scores for treatment from partners and interesting work pulled the midlevel composite score up, but the firm still hovered in the lower half of the pack among New York-based firms. Members of Dewey's enormous summer class, meanwhile, were pretty positive about their experience. They said the program was run well and lavishly praised the firm's recruiting and human resources departments. A typically enthusiastic comment from a New York summer read: "Very warm place. Great people. Awesome summer program." But some worried that full-time associate life was not so wonderful and noted that associate attrition seemed high. Many expressed trepidation about the hours that would be expected of them as a full-time associate. Still, most said they'd jump at an offer of full-time work from the firm. (Responses: 10M, 56S)
Dickinson Wright Midlevels at Dickinson Wright were unhappy about workload and compensation. The average workweek was indeed high, by Midwest levels, at 60.2 hours. Nearly half of the firm's 13 midlevel respondents were dissatisfied with their compensation. One particularly unhappy camper accused the firm's management of having the motto: "The flogging will continue until morale improves." On the upside, midlevels generally praised the accessibility of the partners, and training and technology got high marks. Most of the respondents expected to be at the firm in two years. The firm was perceived to stress billable hours as well and to discourage pro bono work. One respondent said that what he liked least about the firm was "the conservative attitude about everything (i.e., pro bono work, type of clients.)" Summer associates liked the reputation of the firm and the quality of its lawyers, but some said they were put off by the firm's tendency to blow its own horn. Dickinson was close to the bottom of the pack nationally in the categories of the interest of the work for summer associates, and ranked below 100 in every category that we measure for our composite rankings. (Responses: 13M, 7S)
Dickstein Shapiro Morin & Oshinsky The high marks that summer associates gave to Dickstein, Shapiro, Morin & Oshinsky in most categories were somewhat negated by the relatively low scores they gave it on our offer-acceptance question. Their reservations included uncertainty about the firm's prestige outside of Washington, D.C., not being sure they'd be assigned the kind of work that interested them, and confusion about the pro bono program. The result of the mixed feelings was that the firm landed just below average in the national ratings. The upsides were the friendly, unpretentious, and interesting people, according to many. "All partners have an open-door policy," wrote one. "There is no intimidation." (Responses: 20S)
Dinsmore & Shohl Midlevels at Dinsmore & Shohl told a very different story this year than last, when they extolled the firm's atmosphere and guidance. This year the 15 respondents registered frustration with the work assignment process, unequal distribution of work, and career development. "The philosophy of associates as 'property' who are 'owned' by partners to whom they are assigned results in territorial battles between partners when associates are 'loaned' out," wrote one midlevel. The firm ranked 153rd nationally in the category of training, and 145th in interest level of work. Midlevels also complained about secrecy on the part of the management of the firm, and the firm ranked 149th nationally for management openness. Wrote one respondent: "My secretary generally knows more about what's going on in the firm than I do." One bright spot was that the average workweek was a relatively reasonable 52.4 hours, well below the national average. Most respondents were satisfied with their pay, and nearly all said they would recommend it to a friend who'd just graduated from law school. Summer associates gave high marks to the full-time associates, although they had some criticisms of partners, who were portrayed as a bit aloof. Wrote one: "Some of the 'old-school' partners are unacceptably insensitive to the class-race-gender dynamics at the firm." (Responses: 15M, 11S)
Dorsey & Whitney Midlevel associates at Dorsey & Whitney liked the sophistication of their work and the people at the firm, and they gave management above-average marks for openness. One credited the atmosphere to an active and useful associates committee and the managing partner's "open-door policy." Better communication with management has led to some appreciated reforms such as flex-time arrangements and parental leave policies. But many of the 44 respondents were concerned that the firm was increasingly focused on billable hours and the bottom line. Some also said the firm's bloated bureaucracy occasionally made it hard to get things done. Although many midlevels complained about their compensation in written comments, 74 percent of respondents said they were happy with their compensation, and 86 percent said they'd recommend working at the firm to a friend. Summer associates rated Dorsey & Whitney in the top 40 across the board. They praised the atmosphere, the high standards, the exciting practice, the opportunities, and the reputation of the firm. If anything, it could be too casual and friendly, some said. Wrote one summer associate: "Enforce the dress code!" (Responses: 44M, 38S)
Dow, Lohnes & Albertson Morale was still suffering among midlevels at Dow, Lohnes & Albertson, much as last year, despite an internal job satisfaction survey the firm conducted and efforts, some associates wrote, to address their concerns. It's not the work that's got the eight responding midlevels down-most rated it anywhere from interesting to fascinating, and the firm achieved some of the highest marks in the nation in this category, ranking sixth. What kept the firm's overall midlevel score below average was the so-so training-only half said they had mentors-and feeling left out of the loop by management. A heavy emphasis on billable hours and the inscrutability of the partnership track also came in for some criticism. The atmosphere was rated below average, 133rd nationally. Half of the respondents said the stress of the job was affecting their family/social lives. Still, 75 percent said they would recommend the firm to a friend with a new law degree. Compared with full-time associates, summer associates are having a field day, although the firm did not break into the top 100 in the national rankings. Summer associates too, thought the work, focusing on intellectual property, defamation, privacy, communication, and technology, was potentially interesting. (Responses: 8M, 11S)
Drinker Biddle & Reath Job satisfaction at Drinker Biddle & Reath has improved among midlevels since last year, and the firm now ranks twenty-ninth nationally and second among offices in the City of Brotherly Love. Midlevels gave the firm great marks for a friendly and relaxed yet professional atmosphere, and very good ones for management openness, treatment from partners, and interesting work. "The partners have lives outside of the firm," wrote one. "The attorneys generally aren't tied to their desks." Almost every respondent was satisfied with their compensation. Respondents in the main Philadelphia office were also keen on the brand-new office space, which includes an in-house gym. There's still room for improvement, however. Only half of the 21 respondents reported having a mentor at the firm, and few said they could discern their partnership chances. The move to a new office made the summer a little hectic, said summer associates, and beyond that, in some cases, some felt they did not get enough feedback, or enough interesting assignments. But they still liked the firm. "I enjoy the charisma that most lawyers at Drinker display on a daily basis," wrote one. Added another: "Overall, the attorneys here have mastered the art of being excellent lawyers and still being down-to-earth, interesting people." (Responses 21M, 20S)
Duane, Morris & Heckscher "The nicest offices in the city," as one midlevel wrote, and first-rate technology did little to boost Duane, Morris & Heckscher's ho-hum scores from nine responding midlevels. Specific complaints included disorganization in the assignment process, rapid expansion in recent years, cheapness in hiring support staff, and an "old-fashioned view of certain ways of working [and] benefits." The written comments were somewhat out of sync with the numbers. In their written comments, associates praised the firm's atmosphere and the interest that partners took in their work. But they gave the firm only so-so numerical scores in these categories. Some expressed the hope that a recently created associates committee would improve the quality of life at the firm for them, in part by paying more attention to mentoring and training, and also by looking at parental leave policies and alternative partnership tracks. Among summer associates, the firm fared poorly, and was rated among the bottom at 182nd place nationally. Nonetheless, in their written comments summer associates praised the firm's "relaxed atmosphere" and "friendly environment." (Responses: 9M, 10S)
Dykema Gossett Midlevels at Dykema Gossett expressed disenchantment in their surveys. The ten responding associates gave a below-average score when asked how interesting the work is. The firm finished 157th nationally in this category; and one midlevel called the work just plain "boring." Respondents also said the firm puts a great deal of weight on billable hours, and does not offer enough perks and special benefits. Training and atmosphere were ranked in the lowest quarter of the firms surveyed. Two respondents said they were looking for new jobs, and four of the ten respondents were dissatisfied with their compensation. But the firm scored well in the areas of management openness about finances and strategies and clarity about partnership prospects (thirty-third and twenty-fifth places, respectively). Midlevels had high marks for the firm's technology, and some points were given to Dykema for diversity. There's "a good mix of people," wrote one respondent. Summer associates liked the technology, the offices, and just about everything else about the place. They almost seemed to be inhabiting a different firm than the one the midlevels described. They liked the fact that people at the firm were ambitious, but not workaholic. Their impression was that associates were able to lead balanced lives while working on interesting projects at a firm with a good reputation. They felt they got a variety of assignments and appreciated the openness of the management. (Responses: 10M, 15S)
Edwards & Angell Associates at this Rhode Island firm described an agreeable day-to-day atmosphere, and said they found the work challenging. Most planned to stay at least another two years. But the firm fell short in mentoring and career development. Fewer than half of the 12 who responded said they had a mentor at the firm. "The firm rewards and advances the [lateral] associates and lets the homegrown associates flounder," one complained. A few associates also found the firm somewhat disorganized, with one claiming that it lacks a firmwide policy on such matters as maternity leave. Compensation was a thorn in several associates' sides, with 17 percent saying they were dissatisfied. In the Boston office, one associate wrote of an "open revolt" last year because associates believed their pay was below market. (Responses: 12M)
Faegre & Benson "The firm has done a great job of discouraging cutthroat competition and creating an atmosphere where it is expected that all members of the firm will treat each other with respect," was one of the laurels that a midlevel respondent gave Faegre & Benson. The firm scored in the top ten in terms of training and in the top 20 for atmosphere. Overall, it finished eighteenth among midlevels and was the top of three Minneapolis firms surveyed. One associate appreciated that he and his fellow lawyers were encouraged to lead well-rounded lives, and that management genuinely seemed to care about them. "In my evaluation, the practice group head told me to actually bill less the following year," this associate wrote. Respondents also gave the firm high marks for interesting work (it finished in twenty-seventh place nationally in this category), and no respondents said they are looking for work elsewhere. Likewise, summer associates tended to write love letters to Faegre & Benson. The firm "has managed to strike a balance between making money and participating responsibly in the community," wrote one. They rated it seventeenth overall and put it in the top ten for training, overall experience, and treatment by associates. Several could not think of a single complaint about the firm or the summer program. One reached to come up with this: "The summer program is so extravagant that it feels like the firm is hiding the fact that there are some negative points about working at the firm." (Responses: 22M, 24S)
Fenwick & West Fenwick & West must be doing something right. Despite the fact that associates there have one of the nation's longest average workweeks, 61.2 hours, they also rated the firm nineteenth nationally overall. The firm finished third for interest level of the work, and had very strong showings for atmosphere, treatment from partners, and management openness about firm finances and strategies. Still, associates said they'd appreciate a lighter workload. "The work is exciting, the atmosphere at the firm is positive and inspiring, but we just have too much work to have enough time to enjoy time with families and friends," wrote one. Making up, somewhat, for the long hours are the somewhat lavish perks: use of a Maui condo, midyear bonuses in the form of vacations, full-time casual dress policy, free dinner at 7 p.m., and laundry pickup were among those listed. "I'm staying put!" wrote one enthusiastic midlevel. By and large, summer associates were hoping to have that option. Their above-average ratings propelled the firm to twenty-fifth place nationally, and it was number four for interest level of work. Summer associates liked the firm's "free market" system of picking practice groups, the relaxed atmosphere, and caliber of clients. "Everyone has a very positive attitude," wrote one. "People like working here, and it's obvious." (Responses: 13M, 23S)
Fish & Neave Fish & Neave was at bottom of the national rankings among summer associates and, among midlevels, close to it. Midlevels said that management was about as tightlipped as it can be about finances and strategies. They also bemoaned the lack of a structured mentoring program and gave the firm a very low score for training. In fact, the firm ranked below the national average in every major category of the survey except technology and management's emphasis on billable hours. While few complained about the nature of the work in their written comments, the atmosphere got decidedly mixed reviews. One complained of "dead weight" associates and another said some partners treat associates as "galley slaves." Perks and benefits were another area that was found wanting. "The firm is haunted by its long tradition," one respondent wrote, "often making it impervious to real change." But despite a lot of negatives, none of the 15 midlevel respondents said they are looking for work elsewhere. And one associate said not to put too much store in the numbers, writing, "The associates are not as dissatisfied as past surveys have suggested." Summer associates wrote that they craved more feedback and training. Despite the lower-than-average ranking, many found aspects of the firm to their liking. Wrote one: "The associates are extremely friendly and there is a strong sense of being on a team." (Responses: 15M, 17S)
Foley, Hoag & Eliot Life is pretty good at Foley, Hoag & Eliot, which ranked eleventh nationwide among midlevels and tied for second in the competitive market of Boston-based firms. Foley, Hoag earned above-average marks from the five respondents for atmosphere, treatment, and interest level of the work. No one reported that they are looking for work elsewhere, and all said they would recommend Foley, Hoag to a friend who had just graduated from law school. The firm's results were less strong, but still above the national average, for associate knowledge of partnership chances. "There are many eighth-years and sixth-years who are nearing partnership eligibility who still have no idea as to whether they are going to make it," one midlevel wrote. Results from summer associates were similarly glowing. The interns gave the firm top-third scores in most categories, and put it in fourteenth place nationally on our offer-acceptance question. They wrote that they valued the guidance available to them at the firm and described the atmosphere "comfortable," "academic" and "relaxed." Summer associates ranked it seventh of 14 Boston offices. (Responses: 5M, 24S)
Foley & Lardner Above-average marks for atmosphere, work interest, management openness, and partnership track discernibility put Foley & Lardner squarely in the top third of the nation's law firms among midlevels. Associates are allowed to lead well-rounded lives but still be well paid, according to a respondent in the Milwaukee office, who wrote: "It's the best firm in Milwaukee and retains Midwestern values." Reviews of both the people and the work were generally positive in the firm's numerous branch offices as well, although some midlevels complained that the large firm could be disorganized, overly bureaucratic or overly political, and that communication with associates was sometimes lacking. Some in the branch offices said they felt like poor stepchildren, and some women attorneys worried about being stigmatized if they have children. Summer associates liked the firm's reputation and clients, and praised the summer program's balance between work and social events, but said they needed more interaction with the firm's lawyers and more feedback. Whether it is a friendly place was the subject of some disagreement. Some Milwaukee respondents thought so; others did not. Some found it conservative and somewhat stodgy. Some were not sure they had gotten an accurate picture of associate life. The summer associates in the Washington, D.C., office were the most uniformly enthusiastic. (Responses: 55M, 62S)
Fox, Rothschild, O'Brien & Frankel There was no single category in which midlevels at Fox, Rothschild really faulted their firm. They gave it stronger scores for work-interest level and atmosphere than for partner treatment or management openness, a combination which landed the firm in the top one-third of the pack. In Philadelphia it was tied for seventh out of 11 firms. Midlevels were happy with the work, said they were learning a lot, and given much responsibility. Nearly all of the 11 respondents expected to be at the firm in two years; none said they were looking for a new job elsewhere, and all said they would recommend it to a job-seeking, newly graduated friend. Summer associates did not have too many complaints, and thought it was a good opportunity for them to learn. Philadelphia respondents did grumble about the computer system. Some wished the firm had higher-profile clients, but they praised the firm's lawyers, describing them as down-to-earth and well-rounded. (Responses: 11M, 17S)
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson Job satisfaction among Fried, Frank's midlevels has improved somewhat since last year, albeit to just-below-average levels among the nation's law firms that we surveyed. Still, the 34 responding associates gave the firm below-average scores for treatment from partners, atmosphere, management openness, and discernibility of partnership chances. There are "many overly anal people and some unnecessarily nasty people," one respondent wrote. Despite such complaints, respondents also expressed admiration for the "brilliance" of the firm's partners and the speed at which they close deals. Midlevels also praised the firm for having a relatively informal atmosphere and offering them high-quality, interesting work. Some described it as a "true meritocracy." Respondents said they are satisfied with the compensation, although it apparently isn't enough to keep some of them at the firm: Nearly one-third said they were looking for new jobs. Summer associates said they'd gladly fill the shoes of departing midlevels. Some couldn't even think of anything to complain about. Wrote one about the summer program: "The firm does a great job of balancing interesting legal work with great social events." (Responses: 34M, 47S) Frost & Jacobs Strikingly interesting work and stellar treatment of summer hires by full-time associates were the most compelling characteristics of the summer program at Frost & Jacobs, summer associates said. In addition, respondents lauded the program as realistic and well executed. Wrote one respondent: "I've gotten to see all areas of law that I wanted to and have received constructive feedback." (Responses: 5S)
Fulbright & Jaworski While most of the midlevels at Fulbright & Jaworski said they appreciated the quality and sophistication of their work, the responsibility given them, and the firm's reputation, respondents in Houston were less than enthusiastic about the atmosphere. One described management as "slow, unresponsive, and out-of-touch," while another called the firm "top-heavy" with partners. Billable hours were said to be extremely important for advancement. In New York, midlevels told a different, happier story. One described an atmosphere that was "pleasant and unpressured." Another wrote appreciatively of the casual environment and diversity of the work. Another praised the managing partner's "open-door policy." And as for compensation, 75 percent of all respondents, from both Houston and New York, said that they were satisfied. The composite score for the summer program was below the national average, but respondents also had plenty of favorable written comments. Many praised the firm's helpful attitude toward summer clerks, parties, prestige, and opportunities. "I drafted three motions in the four weeks I was there," wrote one. "The summer program is outstanding. Lunches and dinners and social activities every day." But some wrote that they were overwhelmed by the pressure to attend social events, and some said the spending on recruitment was more lavish than it needed to be. Other critics wanted a more realistic picture of life at the firm and more family-friendly policies. (Responses: 29M, 56S)
Note: Law firms with hypertext links paid a fee to participate in Law.com's law
firm marketing program. Whether or not a firm participates in that program in
no way influences whether the firm appears in the survey, or its ranking.
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
    | ||||||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||||
