Management Consultancy v Law

[habituallylatte]

Although some firms may ask this explicitly, either in an application form or at an interview, I formulated the following question as part of my own self-reflection into my motivations:

If you want to work on a broad range of matters, on cross-border, complex transactions etc, why do you want to be a lawyer rather than a management consultant?

I know the difference between what lawyers do and what consultants do, but both seem to fulfil the criteria that people usually point to when describing why they want to be a lawyer. Plus, nobody genuinely wants to read fine print at 2:00AM, checking for typos, and I don't believe wanting to think about fine points of the law is a useful, solid motivation for being a corporate lawyer considering what such lawyers actually do.

So, in short, give me a plausible reason not be a management consultant.

I apologise if this has been covered before, but I wasn't able to find such a thread.

Thanks!

 

[Jacob Miller]

This is a great question. I was never personally asked this, but, as someone who has launched 2 businesses since starting Uni, I have been asked why I didn't want to become a career entrepreneur. The comparisons are somewhat different (law v entrepreneurialism and law v consulting) but I personally approached this similarly to my "why law" answer. The only real addition necessary to the framework I had for the "why law as opposed to X" was that, as well as highlighting the benefits and drivers for a career in law, I was also explicitly highlighting why this was specific to law and couldn't be found elsewhere.

I also don't actually agree with the point about wanting to analyse points of law; personally- and, hey, it may transpire that I'm an exception here- I find analysing law, constructing legal arguments, putting together a strong set of points of law etc fascinating and one of the biggest drivers for me to want to come into this career path. I also think that's a very valid reason for wanting to go into commercial law: the balance between legal issues and commercial issues in your thoughts and work- especially when these considerations in their purest respective forms would, often, be at odds with one another. While I can't speak for the particular ins and outs of a career in consultancy, it never appeared, to me at least, to carry the same attraction of such a broad spectrum of considerations.

Finally- and I don't remotely mean this to sound condescending- if you're really struggling for reasons to go into CL as opposed to MC, it's maybe an indicator that you would be better going down the latter route. At the end of the day, in commercial law, especially in the City, you're going to be working long hours on often arduous tasks like proof reading etc. If that's not something you're willing to do, or that would make you miserable, you probably need to think really hard about taking this career path. At the end of the day, if you don't show enough conviction in your responses to why you want to go into law, that will come across in applications and in interviews.

 

[habituallylatte]

Thanks Jacob!

I appreciate your well-considered answer. I am sorry if I came across as condescending towards a particular motivation for a career in law. What I was trying to get at in that ill-judged throw-away line was to filter out the canned responses to 'why law' which I feel are not adequate (in the vein of 'coz my gran said I'm good at arguing'). Of course, a genuine appreciation of legal argument goes a long way in convincing a person to chose law.

You say that if there is confusion between management consultancy and law, then maybe law is the wrong choice. Personally, I am crystal clear as to what a consultant does and what a lawyer does. However, if you boil it down to the essentials, and ask what about one of those careers appeals more than the other, it is difficult to express without getting into technicalities. Management consultants do intellectually-stimulating work, put in long hours on massive projects, deal with clients, look at documents (to an extent) etc. Therefore pinning down what law offers over that is harder than it would first appear.

You are right of course that legal argument would be a satisfactory distinction. I am sure there are others that we know but cannot express.

 

[Jacob Miller]

Thanks Jacob!

I appreciate your well-considered answer. I am sorry if I came across as condescending towards a particular motivation for a career in law. What I was trying to get at in that ill-judged throw-away line was to filter out the canned responses to 'why law' which I feel are not adequate (in the vein of 'coz my gran said I'm good at arguing'). Of course, a genuine appreciation of legal argument goes a long way in convincing a person to chose law.

You say that if there is confusion between management consultancy and law, then maybe law is the wrong choice. Personally, I am crystal clear as to what a consultant does and what a lawyer does. However, if you boil it down to the essentials, and ask what about one of those careers appeals more than the other, it is difficult to express without getting into technicalities. Management consultants do intellectually-stimulating work, put in long hours on massive projects, deal with clients, look at documents (to an extent) etc. Therefore pinning down what law offers over that is harder than it would first appear.

You are right of course that legal argument would be a satisfactory distinction. I am sure there are others that we know but cannot express.

That's a very fair response- you didn't come over condescending, my advice to consider both options was a very genuine one!

I think, considering the nature of the two (being comparatively close career options), it is naturally an answer which would necessitate technicalities to a greater or lesser extent. Personally, though, I don't think this os something to shy away from: if you can display a good, deep, technical knowledge of the legal industry and its nuances for the stage that you're at, this could go a long way in separating you from other candidates!

 

[Daniel Boden]

Thanks Jacob!

I appreciate your well-considered answer. I am sorry if I came across as condescending towards a particular motivation for a career in law. What I was trying to get at in that ill-judged throw-away line was to filter out the canned responses to 'why law' which I feel are not adequate (in the vein of 'coz my gran said I'm good at arguing'). Of course, a genuine appreciation of legal argument goes a long way in convincing a person to chose law.

You say that if there is confusion between management consultancy and law, then maybe law is the wrong choice. Personally, I am crystal clear as to what a consultant does and what a lawyer does. However, if you boil it down to the essentials, and ask what about one of those careers appeals more than the other, it is difficult to express without getting into technicalities. Management consultants do intellectually-stimulating work, put in long hours on massive projects, deal with clients, look at documents (to an extent) etc. Therefore pinning down what law offers over that is harder than it would first appear.

You are right of course that legal argument would be a satisfactory distinction. I am sure there are others that we know but cannot express.

Yeah just to add to what @Jacob Miller has said above, I'd be very surprised if you were to be asked this unless you had prior consultancy experience. A fairly common question is why law and not investment banking where the differences are a bit more obvious.

To be honest I think if I was asked this I would use the actual study and knowledge of the law and how I enjoy using the law to help solve problems for clients as the key differentiator which obviously as a management consultant you wouldn't be doing. Equally the fact that it is pretty common for management consultants to lean on lawyers for advice to vet certain decisions/deals that are made and so you could argue that, as a lawyer, it is possible to potentially work in a similar way to a management consultant from an advisory perspective as you get more senior and develop closer relationships with your clients i.e. you become a close business advisor as well as a legal advisor.

 

[Jessica Booker]

Having recruited for both careers they are very different styles of working and have very different responsibilities. The big headlines might seem similar, but when you get into the detail of what you are doing and how you are doing it, you couldn’t have two more different careers really.

 

[dets]

@Jessica Booker Hi Jessica, and everyone else here! Super interested in your answer @Jessica Booker and particularly with your background.

Frankly I'm facing what feels a lot like a crossroads at the moment, between associate at my current corporate firm, and moving to associate with a big 4 doing project management in operations & commercial advisory. Main factors for me are culture, comp & growth opportunities.

How would you describe the 'specs' of each career? I've been told I'm a good fit by the firm but been advised to really consider what a move from law firm to management consulting would really mean for me and if 'im ready to make that shift' which surprised me a little.

I'd be expected to manage projects in operations & commercial advisory, which I'd have thought would actually broaden my contextual understanding of the law, and over time I plan to fund my legal studies. So basically, I still want to be a lawyer but with a management consulting firm, which I feel would be win win for myself and the firm I'm with in terms of value & USPs. Is there something I'm missing here in the differences between careers?