• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
Lateral Lawyer Group

Lateral Lawyer Group

We Wrote The Book On Lateral Moves

  • Home
  • Recruiting
  • The Book
  • Blog
  • About
  • Contact Us
Orchestrating a Bidding War as a Lateral Partner Candidate

Orchestrating a Bidding War as a Lateral Partner Candidate

September 25, 2018   |   Written by Adam S. Weiss

As anyone who has ever sold a house (or car, or any item of property) knows, having multiple bidders is the best way to receive a higher sales price. So, too, with a lateral partner candidate who is considering taking his or her practice to another firm: speaking with multiple target firms at the same time is the best way to receive a superior offer. The best legal recruiters are therefore adept at generating several offers simultaneously for each candidate, thereby orchestrating a bidding war—whether explicit or implicit—for the fortunate candidate/offeree. In other words, good legal recruiters actually create markets for their candidates.

Astute recruiters create a market for each candidate by making firms compete

The key concept is simultaneity: offers need to be received, as nearly as possible, at the same time. In practical terms, this means receiving offers within a few weeks of one another so that the candidate is presented with multiple options at once. This approach, which I liken to an auction, has distinct benefits for the lateral candidate. Among other reasons, it is beneficial to receive offers simultaneously because they:

  • Create a true market, in which multiple participants (law firms) compete with each other to offer the best package to a prospective lateral. This includes not just monetary compensation, but also the entire value of the opportunity to join a particular firm, some of which is within a firm’s immediate control (e.g., dedicated business development budget, support, etc.) and some of which is not (e.g., the firm’s reputation in a given practice area)
  • Reflect a candidate’s actual market value, rather than the somewhat random value a single firm might assign to a lateral candidate
  • Create a strong incentive for each firm to lead with its highest and best offer, rather than with the relatively stingy initial offer that they might extend if they were more confident of having an opportunity to negotiate back and forth as a sole interlocutor
  • Are the only realistic way for a candidate to create actual negotiating leverage when dealing with law firms
  • Compress the timeline of the recruiting process
  • Reduce the emotional drain of switching firms, by avoiding, to the extent possible, a drawn-out process of offer and counter-offer
  • Reduce the likelihood that a candidate’s candidacy will be discovered by his or her current firm
  • Permit the lateral candidate and the recruiter to drive the recruiting process, rather than let a single target law firm do so

The foregoing has important implications for the lateral recruiting process. Most importantly, it highlights the benefits of approaching multiple firms at the same time, rather than awaiting an answer from one firm before pursuing other firms. For example, imagine a situation in which a candidate receives an attractive—but not outstanding—offer to join Firm A. If the candidate only then decides to approach Firms B and C, the offer from Firm A may grow stale—as of course the process will just be starting with Firms B and C. Firm A’s offer may not only be withdrawn or lapse; it might also set a low benchmark for later offers from Firms B and C.

Moreover, even if Firm A hasn’t actually imposed an acceptance deadline, delaying acceptance of its offer while one goes through the lateral process at Firms B and C would certainly leave a sour taste in the mouths of prospective colleagues at Firm A—nobody likes to feel as though they were a second choice. Similarly, Firms B and C might also feel that they were second choices, since they were not approached in the first volley. Firms B and C might also perceive—correctly or not—that the only reason they are being included in the mix is that the candidate is trying to leverage Firm A for a sweeter deal. Of course, putting Firm A on hold pending contact with Firms B and C would also be signaling that the offer from Firm A was not attractive enough to accept, thereby giving Firms B and C little incentive to make the best offers that they can.

By contrast, if a candidate is in discussions with all prospective firms at the same time, he or she can truthfully tell each one that:

  • It is among his or her first choices
  • Other firms are considering his or her candidacy
  • He or she will weigh the relative merits of all offers upon receiving them. (A recruiter can also specify a time period during which it would be realistic to expect offers to be made, thereby giving the candidate some control over offer timing)

Not only does this put a positive spin on creating a market, it also gives each firm an incentive to make its decision more quickly than if it believed it had no competition.

Accordingly, lawyers considering making a lateral move are well advised to develop as ample a list of target firms as circumstances permit, and to approach all of those firms at the same time. The alternative approach—i.e., opening discussions with firms in seriatim rather than simultaneously—eliminates the benefits of creating a market, reduces the likelihood of a bidding war, and, potentially, annoys each firm approached.

Adam S. Weiss

An experienced partner-level recruiter with an almost two-decade track record of successful placements, Adam is the author of "The Lateral Lawyer®: Opportunities and Pitfalls for the Law Firm Partner Switching Firms." His recent placements include partners in litigation, corporate and securities, intellectual property, tax, and regulatory law.

Adam began his career as an associate attorney in the Houston office of Weil, Gotshal & Manges, working in both the litigation and transactional practices, and primarily serving clients based, or having business, in Latin America.

A veteran dealmaker, Adam’s business experience includes three years with McKinsey & Co., Inc., where he advised global players in the fields of energy, transportation, consumer electronics, and the performing arts, and GC/business development roles with several early-stage companies.

Adam received a B.A., summa cum laude, from Princeton and a J.D. from Harvard Law School.

Connect with Adam S. Weiss

Let’s have a chat

Was this article helpful to you?  Contact Lateral Lawyer® Group to schedule a confidential conversation, M-F, 9AM – 9PM Eastern.

Primary Sidebar

Contemplating a Lateral Move?

Think you know all you need to about making a lateral move?  Think again.  Even a brief phone consultation with one of our recruiters could help you avoid common pitfalls.

Contact Us

Share This Post

Related Posts

We think you might like...

  • Preparing For A Lateral Move At The Partner Level
  • Lateral Partner Interviews: 5 Topics To Mention (And 3 To Avoid) If You Want An Offer
  • Three Rookie Mistakes That Can Cost You A Lateral Offer

Footer Widget Header

Confidential Consultation

Loading

Footer

About Us

Lateral Lawyer® Group, LLC, is a boutique recruiting firm specializing in the placement of partner-level attorneys with major national, international, and regional firms worldwide.

Contact Us

Lateral Lawyer® Group

228 Park Avenue South #6826

New York, NY 10003-1502

201-LATERAL (201-528-3725)

M-F, 9AM-9PM Eastern

[email protected]

Info

  • Recruiting
  • Coaching
  • The Book
  • Blog
  • About Us
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube

© 2025 Lateral Lawyer® Group, LLC - All Rights Reserved.

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy