American Lawyer: Are You Better Off Moving Solo or With a Group? 4 Questions for Partners to Consider

This article by Justine Donahue, a Managing Partner with Macrae in Washington, D.C, was originally published in The American Lawyer on February 23, 2024.

Jaws dropped on both sides of the pond last summer when Paul Weiss added 13 partners from Kirkland in a single month to build out its private equity capabilities in London, New York and California. While a move of that magnitude is an outlier, smaller group moves attracting less attention occurred at a rapid clip in 2023, and all signs point to more of the same this year.

Already we’ve seen a number of these, such as five energy litigation partners from Eversheds Sutherland jumping to Baker McKenzie, three restructuring and insolvency partners from Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner landing at Seyfarth Shaw, and three antitrust partners from Norton Rose going to DLA Piper. 

Big Law group shuffles both small and large raise a question any successful partner eyeing a lateral move is more likely than ever to consider: Am I better off moving alone or with a group?

The natural assumption may be that, amid increasing industry pressure to achieve rapid growth, law firms would much rather add groups – and the bigger the better – than solo partners. This notion isn’t necessarily wrong, but it shouldn’t dictate your decision. The reality is that, for both hiring firms and candidates, group moves are inevitably complicated, rife with pitfalls, and often break down midstream. As the American Lawyer reported in December, “for every such move, there are 20 that fall apart.”

If you’re contemplating a lateral move and trying to decide if you will be better positioned to move with or without colleagues, ask yourself these four key questions.

Who do you have in mind for the group, and how attractive will the total package be to firms?

Which fellow partners do you think would realistically move firms with you, and why? This threshold question goes well beyond which colleagues you enjoy (or don’t enjoy) working with. It requires thought around who fits with your practice, who you implicitly trust to maintain confidentiality and who you believe will have similar opinions about the best place to land.

Based on your day-to-day work environment, whether to move alone or with specific people may seem obvious. However, taking time at the outset to critically consider the composition of a potential group can make all the difference in how smoothly the process goes once you hit the market – and how successful it will prove to be.

Law firms entertaining a group will analyze its composition through five lenses: practice area(s); economics (portables, compensation packages, billing rates); client mix; demographics (senior to junior); and personalities/reputation. The more cohesive a lateral group shows itself to be around each of these considerations, the greater its chances for success.

Practice area is the first criteria firms consider when analyzing a group hire – namely, will it be a new one for the firm and offer a strategic benefit, or bring meaningful depth and increased profitability to an existing practice? The more specific and defined your group’s practice area and client base, the more attractive it will be to prospective firms.

For example, an IP litigation group that represents generic pharmaceutical manufacturers will have an easier time moving than an IP group composed of litigators and prosecutors with a mix of pharma and technology clients. Add an FDA lawyer to the mix – which may seem like a great idea, as that person’s expertise is complementary to your pharma clients – and you’ve introduced an extra layer of complexity that could tank the deal.

Economics is the second criteria firms consider when analyzing a group hire, and is often why and when group moves fall apart. The importance of understanding your group’s economics from the get-go cannot be overstated. Which clients are portable? Who controls those client relationships? What are each colleague’s compensation expectations (and are they realistic)? Are there nuances around negotiated billing rates, AFAs, contingency, or litigation funding arrangements that affect all or some of the group?

Take, for example, a situation where the group leader represents 80% of its portable business and is paid accordingly. Are the other group members realistic about their compensation expectations and positioning vis-à-vis the group leader and the existing attorneys at the receiving firm?

Put bluntly, rarely will a group move result in a windfall to members who do not control a significant portion of business. And, as the group leader in this hypothetical, it may indeed be the case that you’re better positioned to move on your own without supporting partners diluting your client and compensation ratio. The more aligned these metrics are within the group, the more likely it is that a firm will seriously consider bringing it on.

Firms will take a close look at the group’s demographics, personalities and reputation. How senior is the most senior partner? How do the others’ experience levels complement the makeup of a given firm’s existing practice group? Does the group come from a peer firm with a similar culture, and is it aiming to move up or down market? Is its reputation one that will attract additional business? How these considerations impact the appeal of the group will vary by firm, but you should have a solid grasp on them because they may affect how the group forms and where it lands.

Why do you want to move?

Whether you aim to move solo or as a group, it’s vital at the outset to clearly define your reasons for seeking a greener pasture. What aspects of working at your current firm no longer align with your professional and personal needs? If you complain to your partner or a good friend about your firm, what do you tell them? Was there a straw that broke the camel’s back, so to speak, and what was it?

The reasons candidates most frequently give for being dissatisfied at their current firms include compensation, client conflicts, platform, brand, management, and leadership opportunities. Drill down on these, and any others. Get specific. Use this list to guide you as you explore which firms might offer the solutions and opportunities you’re looking for and, importantly, are likely to have a need for your skillset and client base.

Your next step is to understand which issues the other members of your group are trying to solve to ensure that they are similarly addressed in a potential move. You can see how quickly this could become complicated and potentially uncomfortable from an interpersonal perspective. Nonetheless, if these issues aren’t aired and respected among group members, an attempted move is likely to fall apart.

Once you have a grasp on the above – and consulting with a recruiter either individually or with your colleagues can help you here – you can determine if going to market as a group will enhance or diminish your chances of landing at one of your target firms.

Which clients must come?

Once on the market, the No. 1 reason attempted group moves fail? Client conflicts. To guard against this, your best course of action is to nail down which show-stopper clients must port for your move to make sense, and for anyone potentially going with you to do the same. Preview these clients to firms of interest at the earliest stage possible. This will prevent you and the firms from wasting time with initial meetings and help manage expectations on both sides.

Take, for example, an antitrust trio comprised of a merger, cartel and litigation partner who share some clients. They identify 10 firms to target. As the process evolves, they learn that one partner’s primary client has a conflict at five of the firms, while another’s primary client has a conflict at two of the remaining firms. The third partner’s primary client has conflicts at a few of the same firms as the others – as well as an additional firm.

If these partners stay together and retain their primary clients, the universe of firms they can potentially join is slashed from 10 to two. Moving independently – or as a duo – may clearly be a better way to go.

What is your timeline?

Are you in a hurry? Aiming to join a new firm by a specific date? If there’s any urgency to your move, you will almost always be better off going it alone. It’s a simple fact that a typical group move takes longer. A single partner can often complete a lateral move in two to six months from start to finish, while groups tend to take anywhere from six months to well over a year.

The additional time that group members and law firms must devote to scheduling interviews, preparing and processing multiple LPQs, creating and reviewing business plans, conducting conflict checks, and performing other diligence is substantial. Keeping these timelines in sync requires a remarkable degree of organization, perseverance and collaboration.

These timing logistics are also affected by the pragmatic aspects of your practice, including client demands, compensation payouts, and the terms of your partnership agreement relating to capital return and notice period. It’s imperative that your expectations around the timing of your move comport with these considerations and, if you are moving with a group, with those of your colleagues as well.

While the phrase “every situation is different” certainly rings true for any partner and group eyeing a lateral move, after taking the time to thoughtfully consider these four questions you’ll be better prepared – and more confident – when you go to market.

Justine Donahue is a Managing Director at transatlantic legal search firm Macrae in Washington, D.C., where she places partners and partner-groups into the leading global law firms. She can be reached at Justine.Donahue@macrae.com.