- within Law Department Performance and Corporate/Commercial Law topic(s)
After more than two decades in lateral partner recruiting, I have learned that group movement follows a clear internal logic. There are the reasons groups cite publicly, and then there are the conditions that push them out the door. When you look closely at how groups operate, the patterns become predictable. This article explores what truly drives group movement and what firms must deliver to attract and retain them.
Groups behave differently from individual laterals. They bring stronger client continuity, generate more collective loyalty, and carry more leverage. At the same time, their internal dynamics make them more sensitive to shifts in respect, autonomy, and operational stability. Understanding that balance is key to managing them successfully.
What Triggers a Group Move
Groups almost never initiate a market search on their own. They are too busy and too embedded in the day-to-day demands of their practice. The trigger is usually external. A partner leaves. A new hire exposes or creates inequities. Leadership shifts or a merger redistributes influence. These moments break the internal equilibrium and prompt the group to reassess their standing in the firm.
While the lead partner often begins exploratory conversations, that individual is not always the true decision maker. Associates and junior partners sometimes hold significant influence. I have seen situations where the most senior person assumed they were steering the course, when in reality the group was following someone else's lead. Firms that overlook these dynamics misunderstand how groups make decisions.
It's Not About The Money
Compensation is almost never the core motivator for a group move. If it were, counteroffers would be effective. They are not. When a group reaches the point of leaving, a pay increase does not resolve the underlying issues for the long term. These moves are attempts to restore control, stability, and trust within the group's ecosystem.
Groups do not depart over money. They leave when their internal balance is disrupted and when their standing within the firm begins to erode in ways that cannot be corrected financially.
Erosion of Respect
Respect often erodes long before a group walks out the door. The earliest signs often appear as symbolic slights connected to compensation processes. Slowed approvals, diminished credit, and diluted originations are rarely financial issues. They signal that the firm is no longer listening.
Most of this tracks back to leadership. When communication with the managing partner or executive committee weakens, groups begin to feel excluded from decision making. Over time, that exclusion becomes a stronger motivator than any specific policy change.
In recent years, the broader political climate has also played a role. Some groups express discomfort with reputational alignment, particularly in polarized environments. While this was rare in the past, it now surfaces as a consideration in group movement.
Political Displacement and Operational Drag
Groups become unsettled when internal power shifts reduce their influence. Leadership turnover, mergers, and new reporting structures can all disrupt the stability they rely on. When their access to decision makers decreases, their interest in staying decreases with it.
Operational friction intensifies this effect. Bureaucracy, slow processes, and micromanagement rarely spark a departure by themselves, but they compound dissatisfaction. When a group is already questioning its position, each point of friction becomes evidence that the environment is no longer working.
When Interviewing Groups; What Firms Must Get Right
Firms often focus on the wrong elements when they meet with groups. Groups evaluate whether the firm understands their internal dynamics and whether their ecosystem will remain intact. They are looking for operational clarity, respect for their structure, and evidence that the firm can support them effectively from day one.
Don't Just Focus on the Rainmakers
A group functions as an interconnected unit. If the firm directs its attention solely to the lead partner and treats associates or junior partners as secondary, the group notices. I have watched promising discussions fall apart because the full team was not acknowledged. Every member needs to feel heard, respected, and included in the process.
Selling Capability Instead of "Culture"
Every firm describes its culture as collaborative. Groups do not weigh these claims heavily because they hear the exact same message from every suitor. What they value is evidence of how collaboration actually works. They want clarity on decision rights, workflow, credit allocation, and cross-practice interaction. Concrete examples matter more than high-level statements about culture.
Do Not Mistake Onboarding for Integration
Groups are not just looking for an administrative orientation. They want clear information on billing, staffing, workflow, decision making, and the individuals they will rely on within the firm. Integration requires structured introductions and ongoing, managed relationship building. If the process focuses only on logistics or amenities, the group interprets that as a lack of preparation.
Do Not Ignore Internal Politics
Every firm has internal political dynamics. Pretending otherwise does not build trust. Groups want transparency about where support exists, where friction might arise, and how they will fit within existing structures. Early honesty prevents misunderstandings and helps the group navigate the environment successfully.
What Firms Need to Deliver So Placements Stick
Long-term success depends on reinforcing respect, enabling functionality, and supporting the group's internal ecosystem while driving and supporting new,valuable relationships within the firm. Groups remain loyal when firms provide clarity, consistency, and operational readiness.
Transparent Economics = Respect that Lasts
Direct and transparent conversations about compensation build credibility. Groups remember these discussions long after they join. If early assurances later prove inaccurate, trust erodes quickly. Transparency is foundational to long-term stability.
Preserve The Group's Decision Structure
Groups operate through internal systems that work for them. Restructuring those systems immediately upon arrival disrupts performance and creates friction. Successful firms adapt around the group's existing structure rather than forcing immediate alignment with a new one.
Operational Understanding and Control
Operational readiness is a strong indicator of respect. Billing, collections, workflow processes, and staffing models need to function smoothly from the start. Showing clear examples, gathering input, and demonstrating competence gives the group confidence in the firm's ability to support them.
Agreed-Upon Integration
Integration must be discussed explicitly. The timeline, messaging, and sequence of introductions should be aligned with the group's needs before the move occurs. When integration is imposed rather than negotiated, groups interpret it as a sign that their priorities will not be taken seriously.
Integration That Sticks
A group does not choose a firm because of pitch decks or promises. They choose the environment where they can operate with stability, influence, and respect. Firms that understand the mechanics of group movement and manage the integration process with precision see dramatically better retention and performance outcomes. Effective integration is not intuitive. It requires structure, sequencing, political awareness, and operational discipline.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
