Originally published on March 16, 2009 in our free BigLaw newsletter.
Yankees v. Red Sox. Montagues v. Capulets. Obi-Wan v. Darth Vader. Bitter rivalries, all of them, and all of them fought outside the confines of law firms. But what happens when turf wars take place behind the swank mahogany doors of the world's top law firms? Who's caught in the crossfire when partners duel?
A Group By Another Name That Does the Same Work
Before hiring laterals went the way of the Dodo bird, "Doug" secured an interview with a top New York law firm whose Employee Benefits practice was supposedly larger and more diverse than that of the large firm where he then worked as a fourth year associate.
When Doug logged onto the prospective firm's Web site to prepare for his interview, he found that two practice groups at the firm dealt with Employee Benefits: the Executive Compensation & Employee Benefits group handled compensation arrangements, the benefits aspect of M&A deals, and pension plans, whereas the Labor, Employment & ERISA group handled compensation arrangements, the benefits aspect of M&A deals, and pension plans. Oh, and the latter group handled labor issues, too.
Doug first assumed that the two practices were actually the same, but each had a separate Web page and listed different sets of attorneys associated with each group. He was slated to interview with attorneys from Executive Compensation & Employee Benefits only.
Confused, he emailed a friend who was an associate at the firm for clarification.
The response: "Partner Wars."
Dueling Partners, Dueling Practices
At the interview, Doug asked a senior associate, "Kara," to elaborate on the difference between the two groups and whether they worked in tandem on matters. Kara got up, shut the door to her office, and returned to her chair.
According to firm legend, she explained, there was once a single Executive Compensation/Employee Benefits/Labor/ERISA group. However, the group's two senior partners so hated each other that they split the kingdom and forged separate fiefdoms that continue to perform very similar work. So no, they didn't work in tandem. Associates work for one group or the other; dual citizenship is not permitted.
Doug then asked whether she found the dueling practice group system odd or problematic.
Kara morbidly analogized the situation to a treatment for epilepsy in which the brain tissue that connects the right and left hemispheres is severed. The Executive Comp people never know what the Labor people are working on, and vice versa. This disconnect results in the groups occasionally duplicating each others' efforts.
But duplicating efforts is the least of dueling groups' problems. Kara noted that the split becomes truly nightmarish when the general corporate associates cannot figure out which Executive Comp or Labor associate is working on which deal.
She recalled an incident in which a livid client called about poorly drafted employment agreements from a deal that closed several months prior. It turned out the corporate associates drafted the agreements themselves out of desperation, after failing to determine which Executive Comp or Labor associate was staffed on the matter. All the agreements had to be amended and re-executed. The most humiliating part of it all, said Kara, was explaining the mix-up to the client.
Law Firm Fiefdoms Are Bad for Business
Impressing potential hires may not be the primary concern of law firms, but as Doug's story demonstrates, partner turf wars can affect more than just office politics.
Firms plagued by dueling practice groups or partner grudge matches — even rifts less dramatic than the one described above — are at a significant disadvantage compared to their drama-free peers. Among the many downsides — reduced efficiency and higher bills, which may help the firm in the short run, but clients will eventually realize that they're not receiving the highest caliber at a reasonable cost.
Of course, clients aren't the only ones that suffer. Associates forced to choose sides between partners lose potential mentors and cannot benefit from the experience and expertise of the entire partnership. Associates with truncated skill sets ultimately hurt the firm.
Consequently, now, perhaps more than ever, it behooves squabbling partners to take a cue from divorced parents and put aside personal grudges for the sake of the proverbial kids. If they can't, firms that play host to these battles should consider asking one of the partners to leave.
As for the firm where Doug interviewed, Kara was resigned when she recounted the feud. "That's the firm — what can you do?" she mused.
Doug knew exactly what to do — he hustled out of the interview and kept on running.
How to Receive BigLaw
Many large firms have good reputations for their work and bad reputations as places to work. Why? Published first via email newsletter and later here on our blog, BigLaw goes deep undercover inside some of the country's biggest law firms. But we don't just dish up the dirt. We also mine it for best and worst practices and other nuggets of knowledge. The BigLaw newsletter is free so don't miss the next issue. Please subscribe now.
