
I'm sure all associates in law firms will agree. Our bosses, i.e., the Partners, only know as much as their associates. I venture to add that they might even know less than we do, considering that, in the course of our legal research, we usually come across information that, although irrelevant for the memos we prepare [and are thus not sent to the Partner for review], add to the [lack of] information our sorry little law schools were so benevolent enough to provide us. By the way, for those who do not know how a law firm works, here's a brief step-by-step heads up:
1. A client meets with a Partner to discuss a legal problem. This is usually at a fancy resto or hotel. Client pays the bill, of course, but I'm sure you already knew this.
2. Partner goes back to the office and calls an associate to his/her room. After making the associate wait outside his/her room for half an hour while the Partner surfs the internet, chats with a friend, or does whatever the hell he/she wants, the associate is called into the room. Partner then explains the problem of the client and asks the associate to draft a memo on how the problem should be solved. Partner tells the associate to prioritze the memo and give it to him/her before the end of business hours. It is 4:35pm. For those who do not know, the earliest end of business hours for law firms is 10:00pm. [Ridiculous.]
3. Associate then rushes to research and draft the memo and submits to the Partner [who has already left for dinner with some friends or clients]. Associate sends to the Partner by email, but after several hours of waiting for a reply, the associate figures that the Partner has already fallen asleep. It is 435am.
4. The following morning, the associate receives the memo from the Partner with the inscriptions on the top of the page "OK".
As can be seen from the above, associates, in a very real sense, really control the knowledge that Partners have. Partners very rarely check the contents of memos submitted to them. They simply have no time. After all, lunches out [and/or golf/squash/racket ball games] with clients are billable, so any time spent researching or studying their associates' memos may substantially reduce potential profit for the firm. In other words, the Partners simply rely heavily on the output given by their associates.
Nevertheless, Partners have experience, and that should count for something, right? Nah. While years of experience may tend to give partners an edge in terms of practical knowledge, this fact doesn't prove that associates are less capable in this regard. After all, it is the associate who does all the leg work--i.e., "liaising"[read: corrupting] with government officials, thinking of the best structure to avoid [read: evade] taxes, and the like. Partners merely want things implemented based on the recommendations of their associates. They don't want to do it themselves, however. They have associates to do it for them. So much for practical knowledge, huh?
So, if Partners lack both academic and practical knowledge, what do they really know? Nothing. But the beauty of being Partner is that you can look/appear as if you know every friggin' law in this jurisdiction! In fact, if you dress even more sharply or look even more dapper, you could even come across as knowing the laws of other jurisdictions! It's totally insane! In this profession, form is everything--substance is [next to] nothing. The trick is, to come across as knowing the law, or, if a client asks a particularly difficult question, knowing how to tritely say, "I'll get back to you on that", without coming across as being totally clueless. At the end of the day, the Partner simply asks an associate to look into the query of the client, and the client gets billed. Meanwhile, the Partner has lunch at a fancy resto or hotel, or plays golf/squash/racket ball, or does whatever the hell he/she wants.
Someday, if I stay my course, I'll be a Partner, too. Then, I'll review this blog to see if all of the above are true.
Labels: Travesty of Justice