Asia Chronicles, Sponsored Content

The Asia Chronicles: CONSIDERING A PRC FIRM OR OTHER LOCAL FIRM IN ASIA?

By  
on

[Ed. note: This post is authored by the Asia Recruiting Team at Kinney Recruiting, sponsor of the Asia Chronicles. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates and partners in Asia than any other firm in the past two years. You can reach them by email: asia at kinneyrecruiting dot com.]

** Check out our new daily Asia biglaw blog at THEASIACHRONICLES.COM! **

While PRC firms, Korean firms and Japanese firms have for years successfully recruited US biglaw associates, in ’09 such recruitment was more successful than usual. There are two reasons for this trend: i) most top US firms in Asia were on hiring freeze throughout ’09, making it extremely difficult for even the most impressive US associates to lateral to a US practice in Asia in ’09 (such lateral moves did happen, most with Kinney involved, but not in great number, relative to ’06, ’07, ’08 and ‘10); and ii) there has been a feeling in the market in the past couple of years that some local firms in Asia, especially PRC firms, are catching up to US practices there.

We know a number of US associates who made the move from top 10 US firms to PRC firms in ’09 (some with Kinney’s help). We also know a handful of US associates from top tier US firms that moved to Korean and Japanese local firms in ’09. This type of lateral move has been a good one for those looking for more of an entrepreneurial role early on in their career, especially if they have very strong personal connections at banks and other relevant entities in the target country. However, this type of move has been a bad one for those who are focused on keeping their technical skill set at a top US practice level of sharpness (in order to open up career doors now and in the future).

Unfortunately, most lawyers realize at some point that the skill set is paramount in importance in a legal career, typically coming ahead of even client control when working at top-tier firms. Having joined a local firm, it is very difficult to move from a local firm back to a top US firm, even within the same market where the associate has been getting unique major domestic firm experience. This is true, even if (in that market) US associate lateral hiring has picked up tremendously (which is the case in HK / China this year).

In fact, just in the past month, five mid-level to senior associates, whom I had worked with in the past, over a period of years, contacted me in order to try to move from their local firm back to a US firm. This year, we have taken numerous such calls from associates at Japanese, Korean and especially PRC firms. Some of these associates did choose a local firm offer over a US or UK firm offer when they moved from US to Asia last year. Others took a local firm offer after not being able to land a US or UK firm offer during last year’s very slow hiring market in Asia.

The complaints have been the same. They knew going in that the local firm would pay much less than the NYC market, but the expectation was that they would be promoted to income partner very quickly (in most cases, even a 3rd or 4th year can be on a very short non-equity partner track), albeit at still lower than US biglaw pay for same class year. However, once on the ground at their new firm for several months, these people often realized that, while they are working on the biggest deals in the market, their local firm is tasked with a far less sophisticated part of the deal than their counterparts (and friends) at the top US practices working across from them on the same project. They also find that many of the junior income partners at their firm who came from a top US firm are not so happy, due to their skill set dulling and the need to bring in clients in order to have further advancement.

Sponsored

Now, with that said, for some US associates that have made the move to a local firm, things could not have gone any better. Yes, for the most part (especially at PRC firms) the promise to quick promotion to non-equity partner comes through. Further, for those with great personal connections in China, Japan or Korea, being at such local firms allows such connections and entrepreneurial drive to be rewarded much sooner than would be the case at a top US practice.

Thus, for some, this type of move is a very rewarding one. Unfortunately, though, for many US associates that have made this type of lateral move and regret it, it can be very difficult to get back on board the top US firm career track, where technical skill sets are constantly sharpened and where great exit options to in-house or business positions are available if need be.

Frankly, hiring partners at top US practices in Asia consider it a red flag that a candidate left US biglaw for a local firm recently, simply because it is strong evidence that the candidate is not at all focused on a US biglaw career and may not be sophisticated enough to recognize the quality differences in legal work product. For example, some of my candidates who had multiple interviews and offers in ’09 from US or UK firms in Asia, but chose a local firm, now have trouble even getting a screen interview from the same US and UK firms that pursued them in ‘09. This is somewhat remarkable considering that the number of openings for US associates in Asia at US and UK firms have increased more than 10 fold this year, compared to ’09.

Further, if a candidate has been at a local firm for more than a year, hiring partners at US practices consider their skill set no longer sharp and thus a risky hire (especially when, as is the case today, there are so many well qualified US associate candidates on the market in Asia).

In the top US firm practice track in Asia, there no doubt will be opportunities to be entrepreneurial and this type of character trait is very important at US practices overseas (much more so than in US markets or London, for example), but it is not the same level as in local firms.

Sponsored

If you are at a top US practice in Asia, you can always make the move to local firms, but it will be very hard to make the opposite move. So our suggestion is that you think long and hard about what is the best timing for you to make such a move if you are seriously considering it at this time. For some it is a great move, but for many it should have been delayed for a number of years.

If you value most your biglaw skill set being sharpened and thus opening career doors, then stay in US practices while overseas, but if you value more getting out there and opening doors through your contacts and entrepreneurial skills, then it may be time for a move to a local firm.

Before making such a move, listen to all the warnings you will get from well informed and experienced people you talk to. You will get the warnings, but when someone is making an exciting career move, to their home country and with new fancy title no less, it can sometimes be hard to listen to anyone that has less than a positive reaction. Usually, family members and friends (who are not in biglaw) will strongly recommend going with the big title at the local firm, whereas US partners and former US biglaw associates who made similar moves will give words of caution.

US associate candidates for Asia often discount the advice of their current biglaw partners on the theory that they are not neutral, but they fail to recognize that they are leverage and marketing material at the local firms, and thus the advice they get from those local partners should also be discounted.

Parents and friends, most of whom are not in biglaw and many are not highly educated or experienced to begin with, will often say what they think you want to hear. Family and friends not experienced in biglaw will only see the surface – you are working long hours and have title of associate instead of vice president or partner. Also, family and friends native to your home country will likely believe that their local firms are rapidly catching up to US and UK firms and will within a few years take most of the international and US related work from foreign firms in their market (could not be further from the truth, unless you are looking decades down the road).

Try not to let your excitement and enthusiasm cloud what should be an informed decision. After all, choosing the local firm route in an informed way is a great move. There are pluses and minuses after all and you need to look at both, not just the former. When you stare the negatives of a move in the face and choose to go through that door anyways, you will have more mojo entering your new firm and will have no regrets.

Topics