paying for success in blood 🩸 and reading between the lines 📚
We were standing around during Friday drinks, and the senior associate turned to the real estate partner and asked "so, what do YOU think? how much should I spend on a house?" The partner took a sip and then responded "you know it's in my interest for you to spend as much as you can." The two nodded at each other.
I, being a bit dense as well as a bit curious, leaned over into the conversation. "What do you mean? Why do you say that?"
The partner took another sip as if deciding how to answer. "Well," he said finally, "the more he spends," he pointed at the associate, "the more in debt he is, and therefore the less likely he is to leave the firm."
I remember being surprised. And a little refreshed. I like it when people are clear about what's going on, even (especially) when it may not be in everyone's best interests.
Still, it reminds me of something one of the characters said in "The Black Monday Murders" (a comic book by Image). He was a successful banker addressing a group of students and he said (I'm paraphrasing a little):
"Your first million you'll make out of your own hide, with your own blood, sweat, and tears. All of your subsequent millions you'll make out of other people's sacrifice, with their blood, sweat, and tears."
😳😬
To a lot of practicing lawyers at big firms, this is their reality. Others are making money out of their sacrifice.
I've spoken to happy lawyers at big firms, and I've spoken to miserable lawyers at big firms. They've all faced this reality, and for some it doesn't seem to be a big deal, whereas for others it's a hole in the hull of their ship under the waterline. It may not be immediately apparent, but that ship is going to sink.
So what's the difference between them?
I'm not totally sure yet. 🤷♂️
It almost feels like it depends what crowd they land with and run with. Do these people look out for each other? Or does everyone have their elbows up looking to protect their territory and keep others away?
And, I wonder, how does the picture change when the lawyer at question is a people-pleaser to their own detriment?
🤔
Finally, just a note on the partner's response:
I actually think that by calling out his position's bias and then not offering any advice beyond that, that the partner was actually being helpful (provided that the associate could read between the lines). In one response he made sure the associate was aware of a very important consideration and at the same time, (by not specifically endorsing the advice), he discreetly indicated he did not support the advice. Finally, the warning hopefully advised the associate to be cautious of advice he received from any other person (including any partner) who had vested interests.
All that to say that sometimes the answers you're looking for are there if you're willing to read between the lines.
This was today’s email. Like it? Join here: