Hear me out guys! ...
So, in the other thread on CC called "Truth Behind Horror Stories in Biglaw...," I made the comment that I felt biglaw was "inefficient" in the way it worked its employees and that a better way to get people to be productive and perform well would be to do x, y, z... I won't get into that too much here, but it's in the thread.
If we accept the proposition that biglaw has "problems," it seems that changing biglaw from within would seem difficult.
a.) If you are an associate, then there is little you can do probably (you wield little to no power).
b.) Even if you're a partner, biglaw has hundreds of them and it's not possible for one partner to control all of the firm culture. No one person probably has that much clout.
I play a lot of chess and LOVE games that involve strategy. And I kind of like certain aspects of business too. I like finding weaknesses in opponents and taking advantage of them (in games!!! lol...) ... If I'm a rich businessman (or even if I wasn't let's say), would it be possible to build my own firm to compete directly against biglaw?
Could I create my own firm and a new model of doing biglaw without the 80-100 weeks and an entirely different system of rewards and mobility?
Are the boutique firms with biglaw-like clients essentially doing that? Or do they still operate under 2500 billable hours and the like?
Is the barrier to entry/start-up costs too great for someone to create their own firm to do this?
So, in the other thread on CC called "Truth Behind Horror Stories in Biglaw...," I made the comment that I felt biglaw was "inefficient" in the way it worked its employees and that a better way to get people to be productive and perform well would be to do x, y, z... I won't get into that too much here, but it's in the thread.
If we accept the proposition that biglaw has "problems," it seems that changing biglaw from within would seem difficult.
a.) If you are an associate, then there is little you can do probably (you wield little to no power).
b.) Even if you're a partner, biglaw has hundreds of them and it's not possible for one partner to control all of the firm culture. No one person probably has that much clout.
I play a lot of chess and LOVE games that involve strategy. And I kind of like certain aspects of business too. I like finding weaknesses in opponents and taking advantage of them (in games!!! lol...) ... If I'm a rich businessman (or even if I wasn't let's say), would it be possible to build my own firm to compete directly against biglaw?
Could I create my own firm and a new model of doing biglaw without the 80-100 weeks and an entirely different system of rewards and mobility?
Are the boutique firms with biglaw-like clients essentially doing that? Or do they still operate under 2500 billable hours and the like?
Is the barrier to entry/start-up costs too great for someone to create their own firm to do this?
