Industry News Industry News Resources, Not Brains, Give Biglaw Firms An Edge

If attorneys at smaller firms were paid the same as Biglaw lawyers, and had the same resources, they would be able to provide similar services.

By Jordan Rothman

Many might believe that Biglaw firms are better at serving clients because they have brighter and more talented attorneys. Indeed, numerous top graduates from good law schools end up at Biglaw shops, since these firms pay more money than attorneys might receive in other roles. And there is some truth to the fact that brighter individuals might make better attorneys, especially with cases that involve complicated legal issues.

However, as someone who has worked at both big and smaller law firms, I have seen firsthand how resources really distinguish Biglaw shops more than intelligence or talent ever could. As I have said in a few prior articles, it is my experience that the success or failure of a case is usually preordained by the facts and law of a given matter. Nevertheless, the resources available at top firms give Biglaw attorneys a better chance at obtaining favorable outcomes for their clients.

One of the biggest resources of a large law firm is a highly-compensated and dedicated workforce. Since Biglaw attorneys make insane sums of money, they can be expected to work on nights and weekends and log long hours in order to serve their clients. This is especially important when tight deadlines need to be met or matters must be handled on an exigent basis.

Attorneys who work at smaller firms are not paid as much, and usually do not work the type of hours that lawyers at Biglaw firms do. Indeed, attorneys at smaller law firms usually enjoy a more predictable work week that does not include too much work after hours. As a result, they might not have the time to take advantage of certain strategies that require tight deadlines to execute.

In addition, the larger fees charged by Biglaw firms, and the larger budgets for cases, ensure that attorneys at large law firms usually only work on a handful of matters at a time. Indeed, when I was working in Biglaw, I usually only worked on three or four large cases at once. However, when I was working at smaller law firms, I was responsible for handling three dozen or more lawsuits at the same time. When attorneys handle numerous matters, they are usually not able to devote as much attention to each case, and this is another reason why the resources of a Biglaw firm give attorneys at these shops an edge.

Furthermore, Biglaw firms typically have the time and money to think about and plan cases in a way that is not possible at smaller shops. When I was working in Biglaw, we often had strategy sessions in which we were able to pool our ideas and prepare for each stage of a matter in detail. This had a positive impact on our cases, since we had more minds thinking about legal issues, and we were able to plan detailed strategies for the matters we handled.

When I was working at smaller law firms, I usually had to handle each case by myself. Sometimes I received advice from a partner or other attorneys when we socialized around the office, but there were no other lawyers assigned to my cases who could share my workload. As a result, I was not able to plan each of my cases to the extent possible at larger law firms, and this had an impact on the matters I handled.

In addition, I did not receive the same type of administrative support at smaller law firms that I had at a Biglaw shop. When I was working at a large law firm, I had a secretary who could handle administrative tasks, and paralegals who could conduct great legal research. In fact, the Biglaw shop at which I worked had a library and other resources that were unavailable at other firms. Furthermore, my Biglaw shop had attorneys in numerous offices who handled a ton of different types of matters, and I could reach out to lawyers in different practice areas if I ever had a question.

When I was working at a smaller shop, my firm only had a few offices, and the one time I asked questions of an attorney in another office, I got a pretty cold response. In addition, the only resource we had at the smaller firm was access to a legal research platform, and our subscription was limited. This lack of resources had an impact on my cases and I likely would have been able to do better work if I had the resources of a Biglaw shop.

All told, I am pretty confident that if attorneys at my smaller firm were paid the same as Biglaw lawyers, and had the same resources, they would be able to provide similar services to attorneys in Biglaw. Of course, there are times when brains and ingenuity can greatly impact a case, and as such, the credentialed attorneys of Biglaw might make the difference in certain scenarios.

However, I have also seen instances in which attorneys at large firms tripped up because they did not know rules about practice that any attorney at a smaller shop would understand because of their experience. Indeed, the facts and law of a matter limit the extent to which smarts and ingenuity can impact a lawyer’s representation of a client. In any case, it seems to me that resources, and not brains, give Biglaw firms an edge when representing clients.

Source: Above the Law, October 31, 2018 (https://abovethelaw.com/2018/10/resources-not-brains-give-biglaw-firms-an-edge/)