Related Posts
Hello everyone, I am Data Engineer with skills on Azure and am holding couple of offers KPMG Digital Lighthouse as Consultant : 12.5 LPA fixed +20% variable +1.25L bonus Tiger Analytics as SE : 14.5 fixed YOE : 4.1 years Can you please help me with which is better in terms of growth and WLB with your insights ? Tata Consultancy KPMG India Tiger Analytics KPMG Deloitte EY
Conversation Starter
More Posts
What inspires you to pursue an EMBA?
Additional Posts in Law
Pro
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
I hate free market because it puts all the responsibility on the attorneys, some of whom are fresh out of law school and no idea how or when to ask for assignments. Those same attorneys also have a hard time understanding how long it takes to get certain assignments done. I could go on and on. It almost feels like you’re an independent contractor instead of a salaried employee on a team.
Central Staffing all the way. Avoids some associates drowning in work while others risk lay-offs for lack of work. Also helps avoid insidious discrimination that leads to less work going to women and minority associates. Proper staffing takes effort and needs to be done with an eye to the whole department, not just the whims of partners.
If you are a person of color or woman, definitely central staffing. Places with Free market systems will have a hard time retaining diverse talent.
You should have a central assignment team making sure that each associate is getting relevant experience and staff on certain deals in an equitable way.
Whenever I hear a firm has a free market system, it tells me that there may be a blind spot when it comes to diversity issues.
That’s certainly a legitimate concern. Of course, if central staffing isn’t sensitive to these issues, the same problem arises.
This might be a cop-out, but I like a hybrid system, where associates and partners are responsible for seeking and delegating work as a general rule, but there’s department head oversight as a check and balance to make sure work is distributed on an equitable basis.
We have a hybrid system that seems to work well. Each week we enter our projected availability and then our dept heads review that and send out that availability to the partners so they know who has capacity if something comes up.
Central staffing, at least for new junior associates. After you’ve settled into your own niche, I think free market is fine.
Good staffing coordinator>>free market>>bad staffing coordinator
this is the correct answer
As someone who is somewhat of an introvert, I had no problem getting work in a free market system and liked it bc it incentivizes partners to be reasonable to work with so that you are willing to work with them in the future. I was comfortable saying no and did so on many occasions, although I spent some time in a smaller group and it was harder to say no in that group because there just weren’t many other people the work could be given to. Also from speaking with others at central staffing firms, I understand that a lot of the staffing is informal anyway. If a partner doesn’t want to work with someone they can still avoid them in a central staffing system and ensure that their favorites are staffed for their matters.
As a senior associate, I hate free market because the less fun/more administrative assignments always fall on me when we are unable to find juniors to help.
Free market cuz I’m competitive
Eat what you kill. Step up or step out.
Free market. Let’s me only work for partners I like.
For WLB, try ~boundaries~. If you have no boundaries to begin with, it won't matter how good your free market system is compared to your central staffing, eventually the work falls to the person who doesn't say no 🤷♀️
Also a thread on this in the biglaw bowl if of interest:
https://joinfishbowl.com/comment_kqueoqspb3