Does History Predict The Future For Lateral Partner Moves?

Ed. note: This is the latest installment in a series of posts from Lateral Link’s team of expert contributors. Michael Allen is the CEO of Lateral Link. He is based in the Los Angeles office and focuses exclusively on Partner and General Counsel placements for top firms and companies. Prior to founding Lateral Link in 2006, he worked as an attorney at both Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP and Irell & Manella LLP. Michael graduated summa cum laude from the University of California, San Diego before earning his JD, cum laude, from Harvard Law School.

For those of us who recruit lateral partners, we know how heavily law firms rely on past performance to predict future results.   In fact, most firms administer a diligence document called a Lateral Partner Questionnaire (“LPQ”) that dives deeply into a partner’s practice in terms of the past, present, and the future.  What were your client originations two years ago, last year, and this current year? Same for hours and collections?  How much business will you bring over — low end, conservatively, and optimistically?  We all know that future projections are discounted heavily in favor of past performance.

Maybe recruiters should reciprocally ask law firms if their past performance is an indicator of future results.  We often hear from partners in charge their plans to hire a hundred partners and how they “can move quickly” to achieve their results.  All that said, I’d like to take a look at Am Law 100 partner moves in December 2016 and January 2017 to predict what will likely occur for the same firms next month and the start of 2018.  Courtesy of Leopard Solutions, here is a chart summarizing the moves from and to the Am Law 100 during the hot months of December 2016 and January 2017:

Firm	FROM (i.e., Left the Firm)				TO (i.e., Joined the Firm)
	Associate	Counsel	Partner	Total	Associate	Counsel	Partner	Total
Akerman LLP	3	3	10	16	7	0	11	18
Akin Gump	7	9	4	20	5	3	4	12
Alston & Bird LLP	14	2	7	23	11	0	4	15
Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP	27	7	6	40	4	2	0	6
Baker Botts LLP	22	4	11	37	1	1	1	3
Baker Donelson	5	10	8	23	5	0	0	5
Baker McKenzie	5	2	7	14	4	0	4	8
BakerHostetler	23	6	15	44	6	2	1	9
Ballard Spahr LLP	14	8	4	26	5	1	0	6
Barnes & Thornburg LLP	2	3	6	11	1	0	2	3
Blank Rome LLP	15	17	7	39	5	3	3	11
Boies Schiller	5	1	1	7	8	0	1	9
Bryan Cave LLP	15	14	7	36	7	2	1	10
Cadwalader	14	7	7	28	1	0	0	1
Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP	9	1	1	11	3	0	0	3
Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton	39	1	0	40	2	0	1	3
Cooley LLP	12	3	3	18	11	1	7	19
Covington & Burling	14	1	1	16	10	3	2	15
Cozen O Connor	7	8	7	22	6	1	3	10
Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP	20	0	2	22	4	0	0	4
Crowell & Moring LLP	6	16	8	30	3	1	2	6
Davis Polk & Wardwell	38	2	0	40	8	1	0	9
Debevoise & Plimpton LLP	25	0	2	27	3	2	0	5
Dechert LLP	24	1	3	28	5	0	2	7
DLA Piper	32	15	17	64	13	2	10	25
Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP	15	5	7	27	4	2	1	7
Duane Morris LLP	11	4	9	24	4	3	4	11
Faegre Baker Daniels	9	2	9	20	2	0	1	3
Fenwick & West	12	2	3	17	4	1	1	6
Fish & Richardson	2	4	2	8	2	0	0	2
Foley & Lardner LLP	8	5	5	18	7	4	2	13
Fox Rothschild LLP	12	4	5	21	9	7	3	19
Fragomen	30	1	0	31	7	0	0	7
Fried Frank	11	0	0	11	6	2	2	10
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP	27	1	7	35	7	0	1	8
Goodwin	23	5	8	36	16	1	1	18
Greenberg Traurig LLP	26	8	24	58	25	1	10	36
Haynes and Boone, LLP	14	5	4	23	3	0	1	4
Hogan Lovells	16	8	3	27	8	0	2	10
Holland & Knight LLP	8	9	14	31	6	3	6	15
Hunton & Williams LLP	11	1	1	13	9	1	0	10
Husch Blackwell LLP	4	8	2	14	6	4	1	11
Jackson Lewis PC	9	0	12	21	9	7	2	18
Jenner & Block LLP	11	1	5	17	3	0	0	3
Jones Day	50	19	27	96	14	1	5	20
K & L Gates	29	8	18	55	13	2	7	22
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP	5	2	2	9	8	1	1	10
Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP	6	1	6	13	6	3	1	10
King & Spalding LLP	16	2	12	30	10	3	3	16
Kirkland & Ellis LLP	40	5	21	66	54	2	2	58
Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP	3	4	0	7	7	0	0	7
Latham & Watkins LLP	44	1	7	52	23	2	4	29
Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP	24	1	22	47	29	0	20	49
Littler Mendelson PC	15	3	6	24	14	2	4	20
Locke Lord LLP	8	16	19	43	2	0	1	3
Mayer Brown LLP	17	5	10	32	3	2	3	8
McDermott Will & Emery LLP	11	4	23	38	10	2	3	15
McGuireWoods LLP	19	7	5	31	16	1	1	18
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP	21	2	5	28	13	1	3	17
Mintz Levin LLP	7	2	5	14	11	0	0	11
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP	30	2	7	39	17	0	4	21
Morrison & Foerster LLP	14	8	5	27	15	0	4	19
Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough	7	6	9	22	6	4	2	12
Nixon Peabody LLP	9	5	8	22	4	2	0	6
Norton Rose Fulbright	11	13	15	39	4	0	3	7
O Melveny & Myers LLP	18	4	1	23	2	1	2	5
Ogletree	9	6	6	21	11	8	5	24
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP	11	1	6	18	3	0	1	4
Paul Hastings LLP	21	6	8	35	4	1	0	5
Paul Weiss LLP	30	2	2	34	9	0	2	11
Pepper Hamilton LLP	10	4	10	24	4	0	0	4
Perkins Coie	12	8	8	28	13	3	3	19
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP	7	4	10	21	3	1	2	6
Polsinelli PC	13	3	18	34	13	1	2	16
Proskauer Rose LLP	16	2	2	20	6	2	2	10
Quinn Emanuel	12	1	0	13	4	1	1	6
Reed Smith LLP	14	6	12	32	6	0	4	10
Ropes & Gray LLP	22	4	7	33	12	1	1	14
Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP	4	0	3	7	4	0	1	5
Seyfarth Shaw LLP	4	5	6	15	20	7	2	29
Shearman & Sterling LLP	6	1	2	9	2	0	0	2
Sheppard Mullin	10	4	6	20	6	1	1	8
Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP	6	2	3	11	0	1	0	1
Sidley Austin LLP	37	18	14	69	19	0	0	19
Simpson Thacher	27	3	3	33	6	1	0	7
Skadden Arps LLP	32	8	5	45	6	1	1	8
Squire Patton Boggs	10	7	6	23	3	2	2	7
Steptoe & Johnson LLP	9	3	2	14	1	0	1	2
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP	36	3	1	40	3	0	0	3
Troutman Sanders LLP	21	2	18	41	8	4	3	15
Venable LLP	7	8	12	27	11	4	5	20
Vinson & Elkins LLP	17	2	9	28	4	1	2	7
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz	12	2	0	14	1	0	0	1
Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP	18	2	2	22	2	0	2	4
White & Case	0	0	6	6	1	0	3	4
Williams & Connolly LLP	4	1	3	8	2	0	0	2
Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP	19	2	2	23	8	1	3	12
WilmerHale	16	11	3	30	11	3	3	17
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati	18	6	2	26	9	1	0	10
Winston & Strawn LLP	25	4	14	43	10	0	1	11
Total	1575	475	708	2758	781	135	223	1139

I decided on the date range because many partners receive year-end distributions during the calendar year (as opposed to a smaller group during the year).

It will be fun to compare these numbers in January 2018 to see how close they predict future results.

If you are interested in making a partner move, I encourage you to call our partner recruiting team.

---

Lateral Link is one of the top-rated international legal recruiting firms. With over 14 offices world-wide, Lateral Link specializes in placing attorneys at the most prestigious law firms and companies in the world. Managed by former practicing attorneys from top law schools, Lateral Link has a tradition of hiring lawyers to execute the lateral leaps of practicing attorneys. Click ::here:: to find out more about us.