When lawyers begin exploring a lateral move, many start by choosing one or two target firms. They focus on one opportunity at a time and spend significant time trying to determine whether the platform is a fit before exploring other options. Then the process repeats with the next firm, often on different timelines.
Here's the thing: the most clarifying information about evaluating whether a firm is the right fit usually comes from conversations with the team itself. Those conversations reveal things that are difficult to diligence from the outside. And they often come with happy surprises.
Go Broad
Many of the strongest searches begin strategically broad. Lawyers interview with multiple credible platforms in parallel and learn in real time from the market.
Comparing opportunities side by side can lead to an outcome lawyers wouldn't have predicted at the start: join boutiques they hadn't previously heard of, choose firms that weren't initially on their shortlist, or discover practice paths they hadn't realized were possible.
Why It Matters
This approach is also why our practice focuses on patent litigation moves, where we have market expertise and can act as an advisor through the process.
I wrote about this approach in my latest Bloomberg Law article, published today. It's part three of a three-part series on what happens after a lawyer learns they are not on the partner track, and how that moment can become an opportunity to gain clarity about the direction of their practice.
The Takeaway
Don't limit yourself to evaluating one firm at a time. The lawyers who run the strongest searches interview broadly, learn from the market in real time, and often end up at firms they never expected.
Conversations with teams reveal what you can't learn from the outside. That's where the real clarity comes from.
Check out the full article on Bloomberg Law for more on navigating lateral moves with intention.