Now for the second part of the NAWL survey that I found particularly interesting this year: the finding that "For both male and femail lawyers, moving (laterally moving between firms) is likely to be a better strategy than staying in the lawyer's original firm."  This finding was interesting to me (perhaps more than others) because I have no intention of ever making a lateral move and every intention to make partner at my current firm.  This finding was surprising to me since I was under the impression that law firm management wasn't happy about the ease at which young lawyers move from one firm to another.  I have been told that there is generational strife between baby boomers in law firm management that were brought up to be loyal and Gen X and Y'ers who have no sense of loyalty whatsoever.  The fact that laterals are more likely to make partner seems to fly in the face of that.  Afterall, behaviors that are rewarded are likely to be replicated by others.  The NAWL reports states:

The market for lateral partners impacts promotion to equity partner.  ... Laterals account for roughly two-thirds of women and three-quarters of mthe men who were newly promoted to equity partnership.  A startling 31% of new equity partners are recent laterals, suggesting that they were specifically recruited for or negotiated a move for equity positions.  It also appears that males are recruited more often for equity partnership than females.  Firm structure impacts the extend to which home-grown lawyers or lateral hires are promoted to equity partner.  One-tier firms are almost equally likely to promote women form within or import female talent, while two-tier and mixed-tier firms are much more likley to import equity level women lawyers than to advance their home-grown women lawyers.

Additionally, it says:

In the average firm, women made up almost 30% of the new home-grown equity partners but only 17% of new equity partners who are recent laterals.  These numbers suggest that a women lawyer's career strategy would favor staying at her original firm although the conclusion is tempered by the face that a high percentage of laterals become equity partners.

On the surface, this report seems to say that lawyers (especially male ones) should not plan to make partner at the firm where they start their career and that making a lateral move is a necessary step on the way to partnership.  However, I think that premise is flawed.  I think that it is much more likely that the associates that make lateral moves are at the top of their game.  They are likely great attorneys. They likely have their own clients when they move (and hence have proven rain-making skills).  They may be specialists that are brought to a new firm to fill a specific need.  I think all of these things are factors in promotion that negate the argument that is the lateral move, itself, that helps one get promoted.  Those attorneys may well have been promoted to partner if they had stayed at their original firm or, for that matter, at any firm -- perhaps they are partnership material regardless of the firm name on their business cards.  NAWL's report states that the issue requires more research and I agree.  It suggests that maybe other variables are in play such as large firm growth over the past few years, less participation in the lateral market by women, differences in qualifications of female laterals vs. male laterals, etc.

On the surface, however, the issue is very interesting, especially with regard to the relationship between this finding and the structure of the firm that I talked about in Part I.

You can find my first point of interest in my Part I post.