Law firm or in-house training contract?

[Daniele]

Hi everyone,

I would like to know your opinion about training in private practice vs in-house. I have worked in-house for a few years as a paralegal and I now have a chance to train in a venture capital firm in London. It would be a lot of specialized private equity/asset management work. I love this field since you get to work directly with start-ups and entrepreneurs, but I am wondering if this would be the right decision to make considering I would not explore different areas as it happens with the different seats in a law firm. On the upside, the quality of training would be incredible since I would be working directly with the Chief legal officer, who previously was a senior associate at Allen & Overy (private equity), and another Legal counsel previously also working in a law firm. The way venture capital firms are structured would also mean quality work on deals in a similar fashion to that in private practice. The only doubt I have is that I wouldn't explore different areas so I would be probably "stuck" in this sector going forward. In addition to that, it might be harder to move to private practice as an associate later on. Any ideas?

Thank you all in advance.

Daniele

 

[AvniD]

Hi everyone,

I would like to know your opinion about training in private practice vs in-house. I have worked in-house for a few years as a paralegal and I now have a chance to train in a venture capital firm in London. It would be a lot of specialized private equity/asset management work. I love this field since you get to work directly with start-ups and entrepreneurs, but I am wondering if this would be the right decision to make considering I would not explore different areas as it happens with the different seats in a law firm. On the upside, the quality of training would be incredible since I would be working directly with the Chief legal officer, who previously was a senior associate at Allen & Overy (private equity), and another Legal counsel previously also working in a law firm. The way venture capital firms are structured would also mean quality work on deals in a similar fashion to that in private practice. The only doubt I have is that I wouldn't explore different areas so I would be probably "stuck" in this sector going forward. In addition to that, it might be harder to move to private practice as an associate later on. Any ideas?

Thank you all in advance.

Daniele

Hi Daniele! Congratulations on getting an opportunity to train at the firm you're working at currently- this is a big achievement and you should be very proud of yourself.

I guess the first question to ask is whether there are any specific areas of law that you're interested in practising in/exploring outside of private equity/asset management? I understand the fear of specialising too early on, but if there isn't anything specific that you feel you might miss out on, maybe it's worth taking on the in-house training contract purely based on the facts that you 1) enjoying working at the firm 2) the quality of training will be high and 3) the work you will be doing genuinely interests you.

About the ease of moving into private practice as an associate later on- I think @Jessica Booker is best placed to give advice on this. I do know of people who have trained in one area and then gone on to work in completely different areas, but I am not sure how they did this and the obstacles (if any) they faced in making the move.

 

[Jessica Booker]

It is difficult for me to give precise advice on this as it is not my area of expertise. However, I would assume that moving to private practice from in-house will be tricky. The reason for this is that you are working in a very different way. As an in-house lawyer, you have oversight of everything but only have one client - your employer. In private practice you are much more specialist, but have to work with a variety of clients - your variety comes from the types of clients you work with and the different jurisdictions you may encounter each time. This is much more fixed in-house. So the styles in how you work and the objectives you will have will be very different, even if the topics are somewhat similar. This in turn impacts the skills you develop and the ways in which you are used to working, which can create quite a contrast.

There will be some variables that are likely to influence your ability to move - mainly the relationships you build with the law firms that work for you and how valuable your experience is to a law firm. If you have to manage a major merger during your time in-house you'll probably be more in demand than if you are just doing standard day-to-day legal queries. If all of a sudden experience in venture capital work increases dramatically, then you could be in more demand compared to if demand stays fairly stable.

My advice would be to scout LinkedIn to see if people have moved from in-house into law firms. Using the search function, you could search an asset manager company name and a law firm name and see if anyone has moved between the two. I suspect you will find many more people move the other way though - from private practice to in-house. If you do find people who have moved from in-house to private practice, it is probably worthwhile trying to connect with them and get their thoughts on how they did it and what they think you need to consider.

 

[LJ96]

Hi Daniele,

I am currently training in-house at a financial services firm.

I would very seriously consider whether there are areas of law you would like to explore outside of specialised PE/ asset management. If so, this may not be a good choice. I deal predominantly with banking law matters in my TC but I have realised I have very little interest in this area of law. There isn't really much I can do now and honestly it's quite miserable.

Also, have you asked whether there would be opportunity for you to do a secondment at a law firm? This will help if you did wish to go into private practice later as you will have gained some PP experience so it is worth asking about.

 

[Jessica Booker]

Hi Daniele,

I am currently training in-house at a financial services firm.

I would very seriously consider whether there are areas of law you would like to explore outside of specialised PE/ asset management. If so, this may not be a good choice. I deal predominantly with banking law matters in my TC but I have realised I have very little interest in this area of law. There isn't really much I can do now and honestly it's quite miserable.

Also, have you asked whether there would be opportunity for you to do a secondment at a law firm? This will help if you did wish to go into private practice later as you will have gained some PP experience so it is worth asking about.

The advice on the secondment is great. It’s something many firms organise to keep a strong connection to their clients. They may also be able to offer more informal training opportunities (eg seminar series etc) that you might be able to attend. Don’t be surprised by how much your networks I’ll influence your chances/opportunities, so you will need to really make the most of them.

 

[Daniele]

Thank you @AvniD @Jessica Booker @LJP96 ,

The secondment option is a great idea, I didn't think about it - this is something that would possibly give me a chance to move to private practice later. I will definitely discuss this option with the firm!

 

[Jessica Booker]

Thank you @AvniD @Jessica Booker @LJP96 ,

The secondment option is a great idea, I didn't think about it - this is something that would possibly give me a chance to move to private practice later. I will definitely discuss this option with the firm!

Because the in-house legal teams can often struggle if they are a person short, a common arrangement is for you to be swapped with a trainee from the firm for the secondment.

 

[Daniele]

My advice would be to scout LinkedIn to see if people have moved from in-house into law firms. Using the search function, you could search an asset manager company name and a law firm name and see if anyone has moved between the two. I suspect you will find many more people move the other way though - from private practice to in-house. If you do find people who have moved from in-house to private practice, it is probably worthwhile trying to connect with them and get their thoughts on how they did it and what they think you need to consider.

I found someone a while ago actually - this person had various paralegal roles and then landed a TC in-house at Macquarie (financial services firm), specialising in Asset Finance. She then moved straight to Clifford Chance as an associate, headhunted by recruiters, because her expertise was so niche that the firm wanted her. I had the impression that if you increase your expertise in a particular field then it's about the right opportunities and market demand. In that case, perhaps because of a shortage of NQs in a particular area, a law firm might be willing to provide training...

 

[Jessica Booker]

I found someone a while ago actually - this person had various paralegal roles and then landed a TC in-house at Macquarie (financial services firm), specialising in Asset Finance. She then moved straight to Clifford Chance as an associate, headhunted by recruiters, because her expertise was so niche that the firm wanted her. I had the impression that if you increase your expertise in a particular field then it's about the right opportunities and market demand. In that case, perhaps because of a shortage of NQs in a particular area, a law firm might be willing to provide training...

I suspect there are major advantages of getting someone with in house experience, especially if it’s in a sector in demand or a client they want to build relationships with.

For a NQ, the key element that will contribute to your attractiveness as a candidate is what you experienced during your training contract. Although that might be different in-house, it doesn’t mean it isn’t transferable.

 

[James Carrabino]

Adding to this, I have heard anecdotally that firms sometimes like to hire tax associates from in-house lawyers at Big 4, but other than that I think that the advice on the breadth of training you would receive in private practice is probably right. That said, congratulations on a great opportunity and if you think you will be happy then go for it Leaving your options open if you are pretty sure that you know what to do may not be worth the slog of the TC application process!

 

[Lumree]

As others have said, the main question here seems to be whether you want to explore other areas. You may find that is still possible in-house, but it will be trickier depending on the company/situation.

I think moving from in-house to private practice is more commonplace than it seems. Anecdotally, I’ve seen people move back and fore at different stages of their careers, from NQ to 4PQE to partner.

The connection between them all wasn’t the breadth of their training but what experience, USPs and motivations they brought to the table, as with any job. Training in-house wouldn’t keep the door to private practice closed forever. I’m sure you’d find a way to sell yourself if you wanted to make the move!