X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Fifteen years ago, James Sandman’s first child, Joe, was born. When his wife’s three-month maternity leave ended, Sandman took a sabbatical to spend six months caring for his son. He remembers his first day back to work at Arnold & Porter as one of the worst days of his life. Today, as managing partner, Sandman wants to ensure his colleagues don’t feel the same way. Sandman has expanded parental leave and added adoption benefits. He expanded hours at Arnold & Porter’s D.C. day care center, which moved on-site right before he became managing partner, to seven days a week, from 8 a.m. until 9:30 p.m. Tuition is set at local market rates. There is a 3:1 child-to-teacher ratio. With capacity for 55 children, it’s no surprise that the center’s biggest problem is demand. In this year’s Midlevel Associates Survey, Arnold & Porter earned the highest score of any Am Law 100 firm, and the third-highest overall. Associates especially love the firm’s family-friendly approach. They gave Arnold & Porter a rating of 4.68 in that category, on a 1 (low) to 5 (high) scale, the highest of any firm. Fourth-year associate Joseph Ruggiero’s son and daughter come to work with him two days a week. “It feels like a home,” Ruggiero says. “I get to see [my children] on the way in, at lunch, and bring them home.” Arnold & Porter has come a long way, jumping from 81st place overall last year. In the 12 categories that we rank, the firm did especially well on training and guidance (4.13, up from 3.1); interesting work (4.47, up from 3.5); and satisfying work (4.34, up from 3.2). On the measure of whether they plan to be at the firm in two years, the associates gave a score of 4.19, up from 2.9. The scores may have jumped this past year, but Sandman says the firm has been laying the groundwork for a long time. “It didn’t all happen in recent years,” he says. In 1999 the management committee started institutionalizing associate programs, like mentoring. In March 2003 it hired Caren Ulrich Stacy to head a new professional development group. Stacy, who oversees a staff of nine, coordinates all areas of professional development. In particular, she’s revamped training, making it more uniform, less at the mercy of partners’ workloads. “I remember deposition training, but not really. It was all very ad hoc, and we realize now that it can’t be,” says management committee member and antitrust partner Deborah Feinstein. Large firms in particular need to institutionalize training rather than assume that it will happen on the job, according to Sandman. “Clients don’t want to pay to train people to do things they expect lawyers to know,” Sandman explains. “A firm can’t dictate the cases it gets, so there’s a randomness to [on-the-job] development.” Hired to focus on legal training, Stacy says that she heard repeatedly from associates and partners alike that they needed help in their nonlegal skills as well. So she started a “core skills” curriculum in areas like article writing and placement; supervising secretaries, law clerks and paralegals; and marketing — skills that aren’t taught in law school. In September the firm unveiled a high-tech training center in its headquarters. The center has a digital white board that transcribes notes for use in future training programs. Associates in other offices can participate through a new videoconferencing system that also records program for a video training library. “It improves the quality of experience to have a formal training process because it ensures that all associates have the skills to take on projects,” says Angela Givens, a litigation associate. Associate support does not stop with training. Arnold & Porter names assignment partners to track which associates are doing what to avoid what Sandman calls “the random grab in the hall” assignment system. Shelby Hunt, another litigation associate, says her assignment partner “helps monitor that you’re getting the experience you need to advance.” In March, Arnold & Porter hired Kristen McManus, a former lawyer and career services director at D.C.’s Catholic University of America School of Law, as the firm’s full-time career development manager. McManus works confidentially with associates to map out professional goals, either within the firm or outside it. “There is a cone of silence over her office,” says Feinstein. McManus even works with partners to discuss their own career plans. Givens, a fourth-year associate, says she’s felt free to discuss career plans with partners, including the possibility of leaving the firm, without fear of backlash for her openness. Arnold & Porter’s strong pro bono commitment — it ranked third among The Am Law 200 in The American Lawyer‘s pro bono report and a near perfect mark, 4.97, on the associates survey — feeds into associate satsifaction. “I’m dying to go to trial. I love preparing for trial,” Givens says. She also understands that clients’ needs aren’t necessarily in line with her own aspirations. So she takes on pro bono cases in hopes of more trial work. In September she argued a preliminary injunction challenging how New Yorkers elect their state Supreme Court justices. Arnold & Porter encourages lawyers to do at least 50 hours of pro bono work a year. Hunt, also a fourth-year, says she chose Arnold & Porter specifically for its pro bono commitment. Hunt has an ongoing role, along with a partner and two other associates, advising NARAL Pro-Choice America, an advocacy group. The one sour note on pro bono came from an anonymous respondent. “Athough the firm policy is that 15 percent of your billable hours can be on pro bono matters, acceptance of that policy also varies by practice group,” he wrote. With all that, Arnold & Porter isn’t just good at developing its own associates’ careers. Ruggiero reports that thanks to being able to enroll both his children in the day care center, his wife has been able to go back to school for a degree in massage therapy. Maybe the firm could consider on-site physical therapy next. D.C. GOOD DEEDS TOP SCORES: WHAT IS THE FIRM’S ATTITUDE TOWARD PRO BONO? 1. Arnold & Porter (scored 4.97 on a 1�5 scale) 2. Arent Fox (4.86) 2. Debevoise & Plimpton (4.86) 2. Goulston & Storrs (4.86) 5. Kilpatrick Stockton (4.84)

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.