Coming to the law later in life: working with second-career lawyers.

Engel, Eric Paul ; Wysocka, Jowita L.

When it comes to first-year associates, the image of fresh-faced, inexperienced mid-twentysomethings who went straight from undergrad to law school typically comes to mind. But the fact is, over the past five years, between 6 and 20 percent of students in law schools are either over 40 years of age or have had at least one career before entering law school, according to a 2007 article in the National Law Journal.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The growing number of Americans over 40 embarking on second (or perhaps third) careers as lawyers can disrupt traditional socialization and management structures at law firms. While much has been written and discussed about the differences among the generations currently in the workforce--Millennials vs. Baby Boomers vs. Gen Xers vs. Traditionalists--the presence of second-career lawyers can throw these types of assumptions based on physical age into a tailspin [see "Technology and Different Generations Cause Shifts in Law Firm Dynamics," March 2009, p. 10].

Law firm marketers need to be aware of the differences between 45-year-old, first-year associates and their 25-year-old counterparts. Fortunately, these very differences can offer opportunities for the marketing department. Their unique experiences can offer law firm marketers the chance to create fresh business development strategies. And if a firm wishes to brand its culture as one that embraces diversity of all kinds, its recruiting Web page and marketing materials should reflect its willingness to hire recent law school graduates who are older.

Socialization Out of Order

Our culture's tendency to assume certain patterns and behaviors according to someone's chronological generation overlooks newly minted, second-career lawyers. They may be the same age as senior partners, yet they espouse attitudes toward work habits and technology that parallel those of their academic peers; that is, the people with whom they graduated from law school and were socialized into the profession, rather than those in the same age bracket.

For example, a friend of ours (whom we'll call Doug) transitioned from a music career to the practice of law in his early 40s. He started law school around 2000, at a time when Westlaw and Lexis were already established as the standard, preferred methods for conducting legal research. Doug's experience in law school resulted in his becoming quite proficient at online legal research and working with computers, in general, within the context of the practice of law. Doug's experience and comfort with legal research technology, however, stood in stark contrast to that of his boss (just three years his elder). Even though the two would be considered equals by traditional generational labeling, Doug was socialized into the law and the use of legal research technology nearly two decades after his boss. Where Doug felt comfortable doing research online, his boss preferred the resources housed in their firm's law library. Where Doug felt comfortable telecommuting via remote access, his boss was a creature of habit bound by a brick-and-mortar mentality. As you might imagine, the two often were often at loggerheads over how to "best" practice the law.

Supervisory Management Out of Order

Another issue arising out of the second-career phenomenon involves a radical shift in management, where younger lawyers are tasked with supervising older associates. Although traditionally the path to partnership has involved a linear progression from junior associate to senior associate and from junior partner to senior partner, a fundamental assumption of this model has been chronological consistency. It's an unspoken expectation that a junior associate will be younger than a senior associate and that a junior partner will be younger than a senior partner.

Presently, law firms have no place in their rhetoric for a "senior" junior associate. By definition, second-career lawyers are nontraditional. This becomes particularly problematic in a profession so intimately bound by tradition, where prejudice is frequently tradition's handmaiden. It's therefore not uncommon for second-career lawyers to confront prejudice, be it overt or covert, in the form of unrealistic expectations or questionable assumptions. These can include the notion that older junior associates will have trouble taking directions from younger senior associates and junior partners.

Curiously, under the heading "Diversity & Demographics," the NALP (National Association for Law Placement) Web site--www.nalp.org/diversity2-addresses ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and disability. Yet it makes no mention of age, even though federal equal employment opportunity laws (specifically the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) prohibit age discrimination. Even though the working population is chronologically more diverse than ever, age rarely qualifies as a "diversity" issue.

The findings of a recent NALP survey suggest that second-career lawyers generally do not perceive age discrimination as a reason for their low rate of employment at large firms; however, supervisors may have a general feeling of uneasiness and discomfort toward older lawyers who are recent graduates.

Consider the personal struggle of another friend of ours (whom we'll call Tracy), a senior associate in her late 30s working at a large Denver firm. She reported feeling somewhat uncomfortable when a recent law school graduate 10 years her senior was assigned to her case. Tracy had no issues with the associate's work; she merely struggled with the idea of a non traditional role reversal.

Tracy's hesitation may be attributed largely to centuries-old, firmly entrenched cultural and societal norms at law firms and other organizations that are bound highly by tradition. In light of such deeply embedded norms, firms will need to work particularly hard to educate and raise awareness about issues such as second-generation lawyer management through comprehensive, supervisory management training programs.

It remains unclear how many senior associates and junior partners are provided training on how to supervise anyone, much less handle the unique personal and cultural challenges inherent in managing second-career lawyers. Nonetheless, they are, by design, given increasing supervisory responsibility as they progress in the profession. In the past, lawyers tasked with managing others could at least turn to allies or mentors who could offer advice based on their own managerial experience. Unfortunately, supervisors likely have no one to turn to for advice on managing employees who are chronologically senior. In light of these emergent circumstances, law firms would be well-served to provide training to all lawyers and staff, placing particular emphasis on making the most of generational diversity.

There are no simple answers when it comes to generational differences, as with all matters of diversity. Second-career lawyers are challenging traditional assumptions as a result of being socialized into the practice later in life.

As the legal marketing profession continues to evolve and transition to the realm of business development, issues of all forms of diversity will become increasingly significant. Legal marketers must possess a comprehensive understanding of employment, management and diversity trends in order to be effective agents of firm-wide business and recruiting strategies.

A former communication consultant with the Pentagon, Eric Paul Engel is executive director of KetchCom Development, Inc., a professional and organizational communication/business development practice that focuses on lawyers and law firms. Jowita L. Wysocka is a business litigation attorney in St. Petersburg, Fla. with experience in legal marketing, recruiting, and consulting.