Hunters stalk lawyer game

Specialists are on clandestine missions to poach top partners from firms.

But are such methods value for money? asks Emma Vere-Jones

Legal head-hunters do not like publicity.

Unlike their counterparts in recruitment, as far as head-hunters are concerned no news is good news.

Search executives, as they are also known, have done a good job of maintaining their anonymity - and they intend to keep it that way.

It is not difficult to figure out why.

Discretion is a key aspect of doing their job successfully.

Indeed, one head-hunter admits to regularly using pseudonyms when leaving messages for potential 'targets'.

But while they are happy to keep their low profile, the presence of head-hunters in the legal marketplace is increasing.

Search executives have been common in big business for some time.

Similarly, for in-house counsel, head-hunting is not a new practice.

'Chief executives are head-hunted, senior management is head-hunted, in-house counsel expect to be head-hunted too,' says Sonya Rayner, a specialist in-house search executive for Chambers & Partners.

However, in private practice, the search industry is in its infancy.

Only in recent years have law firms followed the lead of commerce and industry, and the banking sector, and turned to head-hunters when looking to recruit at a senior level.

Search, it seems, is on the rise.

This is the result in part of a greater movement of partners between practices.

Traditionally, it was considered poor form to move firms.

'There used to be the feeling that you were almost being adulterous if you left the firm you had trained with,' says Fiona Clarke, a consultant specialising in private practice at executive search company Heidrick & Struggles International.

However, this tradition has changed, as has the breakdown of the magic circle agreement whereby the top firms did not poach each other's partners.

At the same time, law firms have, to some degree, cast off their cloak of secrecy.

Like other businesses, they are increasingly open about their fees and profits, and are more competitive.

This means law firms will do what it takes to get the best people for the jobs.

It also means partners have a better idea of the work they could do - and the money they could earn - at other firms.

These changes to the culture of the legal market have been welcomed by head-hunters.

The freedom for lawyers to move, and the desire by firms to snap up the best candidates they can has led to a dramatic increase in work.

'In the last seven years the market has really matured,' says Ms Clarke.

'This increase is also a legacy of the fact that it has been a very buoyant market over the last few years,' adds a director of a niche legal search firm who preferred not to be named.

The reasons for a partner's move can be many: the lack of a challenge, changes in the culture of a firm because of a merger or change in management, or a lack of career growth.

'It's quite common for junior partners to get stuck in a bottleneck,' Ms Clarke adds.

And there's also the money, although, as Ms Clarke says, partners rarely move for money alone.

For both clients and potential candidates, the discretion of search is often a major selling point.

'The legal world is a very small one,' Ms Clarke says.

'It can be a bit embarrassing for a firm to make initial contact with a potential candidate whom they regularly meet in negotiations.'

The search executive offers a firm the opportunity to approach a target, and gauge their amenability to a move, without revealing the practice's identity.

Similarly, potential candidates can explore new possibilities without the risk of their current firms finding out.

A good search executive may also have wider knowledge of potential candidates.

'We can address a much larger universe,' says one head-hunter.

And, while traditional recruitment still plays a large part in finding staff, head-hunters say their method allows firms to get the best candidates.

'We target the best, not the unhappy,' Ms Clarke says.

Their aim is not to find those who are considering a move, but those who are best suited to the job.

'People are looking for partners that other law firms don't want to lose,' says a consultant from another executive search firm.

Consequently, the skill of the good head-hunter is not only finding the best possible candidate, but also selling that potential candidate on the job itself - often a more difficult task.

'Our challenge is to persuade a partner to go for a role he wouldn't have thought about that morning,' Ms Clarke explains.

As yet there are still only a few players in the market who have these skills, maintains one search executive.

The immaturity of the market is reflected by the fact that there are few niche players.

But this is beginning to change with the addition of specialists such as Fox Rodney Search, Glass Consultancy, and Deacon Winehouse.

'The advantage of being a niche player is really knowing the market well,' says a director from one niche head-hunter.

'Some critics of the larger firms say that's where they [larger head-hunters] fall short.

While they have all the executive search tools, they may not have an individual who really knows the legal market well.'

To avoid a conflict of interest, search companies limit their list of clients.

The legal arm of one search company, for example, works for just six firms: one magic circle, a couple of top ten City practices, two US, and one associated with accountants.

This means there is a shortage in the market - some niche firms already have private practices queuing up for a place on the books.

As the use of search grows, there is likely to be an increase of players in the market.

However, one consultant says: 'It is a very difficult game to get right.' Without in-depth industry knowledge a search executive may not be successful - many lawyers have received calls from head-hunters who seem to have picked out their names almost at random.

'And as a legal search executive, I'm not going to complain about the fact there a few competitors in our area,' he adds.

Indeed, it seems head-hunters have something of a cushy number at the moment.

Unlike recruitment, head-hunters have been less affected by 11 September and the economic downturn.

'We deal with strategic appointments for specific roles, and that has been largely unaffected,' says one consultant.

'We have been active at a senior level,' agrees Mark Stroyan of Spencer Stuart & Associates.

'We've been busy across the board - both private practice and in-house.

Where there's a strategic need the hiring process must continue.'

However, Ms Clarke says there has been more hesitancy on the part of potential candidates: 'The candidates did seem to adopt a "wait and see" attitude.

There was an atmosphere of nervousness.

People were sitting tight.'

Head-hunters do come at a cost.

Search executives are particularly reticent to talk about fees; however, law firms can expect to pay up to 30% of the candidate's first-year salary.

Usually this is paid in three parts: the first third up front, the second third on delivery of a shortlist, and the final third when a candidate is placed.

But it seems that firms are prepared to pay the price in order to get what they maintain is a better-quality candidate.

And for this reason the world of search looks set to increase.

'Head-hunters now have a very clear place in the fabric of the legal market,' Ms Clarke says.

'A few years ago, lawyers were bemused when there was a head-hunter on the end of the phone; these days they're not surprised.

Head-hunters are becoming part and parcel of legal life.'