In this article from Above the Law, the author comments on changing attitudes by summer associate regarding the importance of attending firm networking events. I found it very interesting but not necessarily persuasive. However, it got me thinking, which is always a plus.
Like the author, I always have believed that firm networking events were “need to show up” events. Building a network at your firm can become just as important as building a network outside the firm. Inside the firm, you are meeting the people who will decide your trajectory in the law firm, and outside the firm you are meeting the people who can become clients of the firm for which you may be able to take some credit. Both are very important career goals, and, thus, networking is typically viewed as very important. Also, like the author, I am sure that I have expressed that bias in writing. Advice like “Your network is your net worth” comes to mind.
However, the Above the Law article makes clear that the passage of time includes changed attitudes. It is a candid view of the reasons on both sides of the issue and recognizes the inconveniences created by historically have been considered to be mandatory show-ups. These changed attitudes reflect societal, economic, and cultural changes that are evidence of growth and different ways of looking at expectations. I appreciate the various perspectives, and I consider myself better informed on the subject.
Perhaps you will have that same experience after reading the article. At the very least it will allow you to figure out where you come out on the issue before you are confronted with an invitation to the next networking event. Because, for certain, those invitations will keep coming. Law firms are managed by a lot of “old school” folks, and you may be called on to state the other side of the issue one day. Be prepared and argue your case well.
Extra: As a follow-up to my recent blog asking the question whether BigLaw firms that have cooperated with the Trump Administration Executive Orders will experience buyer’s remorse, Above The Law recently reported the following. According to its 2025 Biglaw Intimidation Survey (yes, that is what it is called), only 1% of respondents who work at in-house legal departments say the deals with Trump have no impact on their relationship with the BigLaw firms that capitulated. As one in-house respondent put it, “I need strong, principled attorneys on our side. Not spineless bean counters looking to preserve their bottom line above all else.” That just may b e a reliable answer to my question.
