🚨 Reed Smith has just announced its Direct Training Contract route!
The deadline is 20th June.

👉 Read Becca's announcement post here
📝 Apply directly here

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Andrei Radu" data-source="post: 208195" data-attributes="member: 36777">If you are interested in just making partner, the easiest firm to do that at should be Kirkland. This might strike you as difficult to believe, but it is likely true, as Kirkland is known to have a policy to automatically promote every associate at 6 PQE to the status of non equity partner (NEP). It has been quite a successful business model as it allows them to keep the NEPs on exactly the same Cravath payscale that all top US firms have to pay at the relevant PQE level while also (i) enabling the firm to charge higher rates to clients (as many clients will simply be willing to pay more when they see the word 'partner', without enquiring much as to the promotion policies at the firm) and (ii) keep senior associates for longer at the firm without giving them equity in the business. As a result of Kirkland's success other firms have increasingly been starting to add non-equity partnership tiers as well, although I do not know of any that does it automatically. I think in most cases a promotion to NEP at other firms is done either: (i) as a preliminary step in the path to equity, giving the firm a period to test out the person for a period, while also potentially waiting for equity places to open as a result of retirements; or (ii) in a similar vein to a counsel role, giving recognition to a practitioner for the highest level of technical expertise but who does not want/is not given a business development role and ownership of the firm. At firms besides Kirkland it normally comes with slightly higher pay than that for 8PQE associates (but never comes near equity partner compensation figures) and better flexibility around hours/WFH. While reaching a NEP tier is certainly difficult and requires a consistent track record of excellent technical ability over many years, it is not thought of as being very "competitive". This is in the sense that most people do not get/retain a NEP role not because they want one but are not given it by a firm, but that they either do not last enough in the profession to be considered for it (the primary reason, as big law has a very high attrition rate) or because they want equity partnership (as they stand to earn anywhere from 2-5 times what they would as a NEP even as a non-rainmaker). The truly difficult task is making equity, and it is apparently only getting harder nowadays - firms are competing so fiercely for rainmakers on lateral hiring markets, and a high average PEP is the ultimate currency. As such, firms are guarding their equity tiers jealously and getting promoted is a feat that is more and more connected to business development outlook. Essentially, there is a tend towards a "winner takes it all" market, and this comes at a cost: those $7m+ average PEPs and $20m compensation packages for stars would not be possible with the promotion rates common 20 or 30 years ago. Now, to come back to your question about which firms it is easier to make equity partner at: as Jessica said, there is no absolute answer. An argument can be made that the higher the average PEP of a firm, the more difficult will it be - a firm will need to see a significantly stronger business case for you to justify a dilutive effect on profit pools of $2 million (which is around what many junior partners will earn at V10 US firms) than of between 500-700k (which would be more the range for at midmarket UK firms). I have also been told by some people that making equity at a V10-V20 firm (who are generally the most profitable non-boutique firms in the world) is more difficult than in other places, particularly in a non-US office. However, my anecdotal evidence is limited to that effect, and I know it is also the case that those firms are able to charge significantly higher rates than rivals. This might mean that while it is indeed true that a top US/MC firm will need to see a stronger business case in your favour than a midmarket UK firm, the same level of business development skills that would have been needed for promotion at the midmarket firm could naturally lead to a stronger business case for promotion if you worked at a US/MC firm before (as you will have had regular contact and the opportunity to develop relationships with clients that would bring in higher revenues).</blockquote>

Verification: Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?

Top Bottom

Search

Search

Reply to thread