David – we have to realize it’s not necessarily a a dichotomy between large firm practice and income. Young lawyers have to realize that if they leave a job at a large firm, they don’t necessarily sacrifice income either (at least long term). Yes, there are many solos barely scraping by but there are also those who earn incomes that exceed biglaw associate salaries. I agree with the stop whining and start exploring the great opportunities outside of biglaw.

David – we have to realize it’s not necessarily a a dichotomy between large firm practice and income. Young lawyers have to realize that if they leave a job at a large firm, they don’t necessarily sacrifice income either (at least long term). Yes, there are many solos barely scraping by but there are also those who earn incomes that exceed biglaw associate salaries. I agree with the stop whining and start exploring the great opportunities outside of biglaw.

First, thanks for the welcome. It’s appreciated.

Second, let me join in the debate and share my perpective. As a card-carrying free-market capitalist and libertarian, I have no problem with people showing greed or self-interest. I taught at the Harvard Business School, after all!

Lots of other professions and industries are denoted by the pursuit of profits, so if we are to understand what makes law firms different (and they ARE) then we need to look beyond that argument.

I agree completely that the organizational practices and behavior have absolutely nothing to do with the way the pricing structure is set up. You’d still get the short-termism regardless of how fees are set.

I don’t mean to sound like a cult member, but Ayn Rand’s terminology – the need for *enlightened* self-interest is a helpful perspective. It means understanding that getting what you want is about building relationships (with colleagues, clients and subordinates) so that you don’t just maximize what they give you today, but you also ensure that they will be there to give it to you again tomorrow.

So, now, the interesting proposition is: if law firms are no more or less greedy than anyone else, are they more or less *short-term* greedy? Do they, in fact, operate with an air of “if you don’t like it, walk, who needs you?”

I think a case can be made that yes, law firms are different on precisely this dimension. The next question is: why?

First, thanks for the welcome. It’s appreciated.

Second, let me join in the debate and share my perpective. As a card-carrying free-market capitalist and libertarian, I have no problem with people showing greed or self-interest. I taught at the Harvard Business School, after all!

Lots of other professions and industries are denoted by the pursuit of profits, so if we are to understand what makes law firms different (and they ARE) then we need to look beyond that argument.

I agree completely that the organizational practices and behavior have absolutely nothing to do with the way the pricing structure is set up. You’d still get the short-termism regardless of how fees are set.

I don’t mean to sound like a cult member, but Ayn Rand’s terminology – the need for *enlightened* self-interest is a helpful perspective. It means understanding that getting what you want is about building relationships (with colleagues, clients and subordinates) so that you don’t just maximize what they give you today, but you also ensure that they will be there to give it to you again tomorrow.

So, now, the interesting proposition is: if law firms are no more or less greedy than anyone else, are they more or less *short-term* greedy? Do they, in fact, operate with an air of “if you don’t like it, walk, who needs you?”

I think a case can be made that yes, law firms are different on precisely this dimension. The next question is: why?