Jump to content
mazzystar

Getting An MBA while Working in Law?

Recommended Posts

So I am a 2L increasingly jaded by the idea of working in law and how static the field is. Don't get me wrong, I like law school and I love listening to my professors discuss realworld issues, but my courses don't fit with my generalist/flexible learning style, dislike how outdated everything feels in terms of teaching philosophy and the artificial difficulty they place (e.g. make things unnecessarily less efficient etc).

I am further jaded by the career progression system, the unhealthy chronic stress-and-ego vibe from some lawyers and see the field as overtly entrenched and out of tune with how society and technology is evolving as well as the unnecessary hierarchies and non-teamwork mentality.

My courses are generally going well, I am fairly active socially but considered dropping out during reading week. My motivation has disappeared this term. It was hard for me to bother studying last exam season and generally did so 2-3 days before exams, though I got mostly above average grades. This term is a lot more content for me and I am not sure I will have the energy to push through.

I can envision mid-career depression at some stage continuing this track. Please feed me your lawyer parachuting stories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sound kinda burnt-out. It happens. Many MBA programs require you to work for 2 years before starting and if you think ego and hierarchy are bad in law, finance is a whole different world.

23 minutes ago, mazzystar said:

the career progression system, the unhealthy chronic stress-and-ego vibe from some lawyers and see the field as overtly entrenched and out of tune with how society and technology is evolving as well as the unnecessary hierarchies and non-teamwork mentality.

It also sounds like you have only been exposed to a small cross section of law. Many non-biglaw firms (and some biglaw firms, actually) are nothing like this. I suggest you poke around and see what the legal world has to offer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, setto said:

You sound kinda burnt-out. It happens. Many MBA programs require you to work for 2 years before starting and if you think ego and hierarchy are bad in law, finance is a whole different world.

It also sounds like you have only been exposed to a small cross section of law. Many non-biglaw firms (and some biglaw firms, actually) are nothing like this. I suggest you poke around and see what the legal world has to offer. 

Agreed on the burnt out. I am spending more of my time reading non-school books or learning unrelated material. 

There is more that could be done than finance, and the personalities I know working in Toronto's financial sector are fairly humble and relaxed compared to lawyers. Ideally I think a management consultant gig is something I'd rather do. MBAs also teach courses that involve organizational psychology, behavioral economics, and other fields whereas law just seems to isolate itself from everything and creates its own bubble. 

I contemplated going into criminal law or enforcement, not sure about the prosecutor route since they get a lot of flack (e.g. lots of lawyers/students disparaging how all they do is lock up minorities for non-violent offenses). I am interested in forensics, very technical crimes or ones with a strong psychological element though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did you go to law school? The issue I have with these types of questions is that you want to jump ship before you've even practiced law. Law school has very little to do with the practice of law itself. You seem to also be generalizing an entire field here in broad strokes. Not everyone is aiming for a Biglaw job in downtown Toronto, and these jobs represent only a fraction of legal jobs out there. 

I recommend reaching out to lawyers in different fields, practice areas, and firm sizes and having coffee chats with them about their work and daily lives. You may be pleasantly surprised. 

And who cares if other lawyers and students are going to disparage your career choice. This isn't high school anymore. You do what you want to do for yourself and no other reason should matter. 

You can certainly pursue an MBA but the work environment and culture in management consulting and finance is not all that different from law. You will also be competing for jobs with people who have STEM and business degrees and significant, and relevant, work experience. 

Canadian MBA degrees have become degree mills flooded with international students. I am not sold on how much value you can get out of them, especially if you are aiming for MBB firms like McKinsey, BCG, and Bain. 

Edited by Deadpool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mazzystar said:

Agreed on the burnt out. I am spending more of my time reading non-school books or learning unrelated material. 

There is more that could be done than finance, and the personalities I know working in Toronto's financial sector are fairly humble and relaxed compared to lawyers. Ideally I think a management consultant gig is something I'd rather do. MBAs also teach courses that involve organizational psychology, behavioral economics, and other fields whereas law just seems to isolate itself from everything and creates its own bubble. 

I contemplated going into criminal law or enforcement, not sure about the prosecutor route since they get a lot of flack (e.g. lots of lawyers/students disparaging how all they do is lock up minorities for non-violent offenses). I am interested in forensics, very technical crimes or ones with a strong psychological element though.

Quite frankly, it sounds to me like you have a very superficial and immature view of what lawyers do in a variety of fields. Bear in mind as I say this - I'm a defence lawyer. I butt heads with the Crown on any number of issues. But the one thing I would not say about them is that they should be disparaged because they lock up minorities for non-violent offences. So you ... what? Heard a couple of people say something and decided it isn't for you?

Asking questions is fine, but I'd strongly encourage you to do two VERY important things before making sudden career moves. First, figure out what you ACTUALLY WANT out of your career. Because right now it sounds like you want everything. You want an intellectually fascinating practice. You want a comfortable and relaxed work environment. You want a job where you get to unambiguously be a hero, so that you can tell anyone what you do and they all think it's neat. And you apparently want more besides. How you imagine you're going to get that with an MBA is beyond me. But whatever. My basic point is, no one gets everything. So pursuing everything at the same time is a waste of time and energy. You need to figure out what you MOST care about in your job, and focus your ambitions on getting that. Second, you need to learn a lot more about what jobs in law (and perhaps outside of law) actually entail, so you can compare (a) to (b).

Honestly, there could be a lot of different things going on with you right now, but when generally smart people start complaining about the law being too inflexible and prescriptive, it usually means that someone told you in class your creativity isn't welcome and no one cares how you think the law should work. That's flatly true. You work with the law we have, not with the law you think we should have. I suppose if you want to be an artist you can paint or compose whatever you want (though even there you should built a knowledgeable foundation first) but in all fields, you're going to be told to shut up and learn before you start telling everyone what you think. I hate to have a "kids today" moment, but here it is. Kids today seem to think that their work environment should prize what they themselves thought up over breakfast rather than what authorities in the field learned and developed over long periods of time. And that's just crap. In any field, you can eventually contribute to change. In law also. But first you need to learn the existing law down cold. And expecting otherwise - expecting professionals twice your age to welcome you to the job environment and say something like "thank God you're here - we don't know how to do this and we're hoping you can teach us!" is probably unrealistic.

Note - I REALLY ran with a few vague statements you made and just drew sweeping conclusions. If they are unwarranted, I apologize. But I'm leaving them in just in case they are useful. I was prone to the same thing when I was younger. Still am, somewhat. But I know it's a dangerous instinct. The law is built on a very solid foundation. Desperately smart and committed people have put entire lifetimes into figuring this stuff out in the past. Learn it well, because that's what gives you the knowledge base to tinker with it when you're ready. It isn't a waste of your time to learn how and why it works the way it does right now, or even how and why it worked differently in the past. A lot of smart people did a lot of smart things before millennials and their non-hierarchical thinking came along. Don't be too quick to dismiss it.

Edited by Diplock
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Diplock said:

Quite frankly, it sounds to me like you have a very superficial and immature view of what lawyers do in a variety of fields. Bear in mind as I say this - I'm a defence lawyer. I butt heads with the Crown on any number of issues. But the one thing I would not say about them is that they should be disparaged because they lock up minorities for non-violent offences. So you ... what? Heard a couple of people say something and decided it isn't for you?

Asking questions is fine, but I'd strongly encourage you to do two VERY important things before making sudden career moves. First, figure out what you ACTUALLY WANT out of your career. Because right now it sounds like you want everything. You want an intellectually fascinating practice. You want a comfortable and relaxed work environment. You want a job where you get to unambiguously be a hero, so that you can tell anyone what you do and they all think it's neat. And you apparently want more besides. How you imagine you're going to get that with an MBA is beyond me. But whatever. My basic point is, no one gets everything. So pursuing everything at the same time is a waste of time and energy. You need to figure out what you MOST care about in your job, and focus your ambitions on getting that. Second, you need to learn a lot more about what jobs in law (and perhaps outside of law) actually entail, so you can compare (a) to (b).

Its not my view of defense or crown. I am fairly neutral and don't hold these extreme views of it. I have talked to prosecutors, they are fairly socially progressive and I am at odds with some of the comments I here about them. I am still considering the option for criminal law and lean heavily towards joining an enforcement agency. 

Out of a career though I would rather get flexible progression, non-static hierarchies and be surrounded by people who are fairly entrepreneurial, curious or both. Law has a lot of that, for sure, but I am at odds with how the system around it has developed. 

Quote

 

Honestly, there could be a lot of different things going on with you right now, but when generally smart people start complaining about the law being too inflexible and prescriptive, it usually means that someone told you in class your creativity isn't welcome and no one cares how you think the law should work. That's flatly true. You work with the law we have, not with the law you think we should have. I suppose if you want to be an artist you can paint or compose whatever you want (though even there you should built a knowledgeable foundation first) but in all fields, you're going to be told to shut up and learn before you start telling everyone what you think. I hate to have a "kids today" moment, but here it is. Kids today seem to think that their work environment should prize what they themselves thought up over breakfast rather than what authorities in the field learned and developed over long periods of time. And that's just crap. In any field, you can eventually contribute to change. In law also. But first you need to learn the existing law down cold. And expecting otherwise - expecting professionals twice your age to welcome you to the job environment and say something like "thank God you're here - we don't know how to do this and we're hoping you can teach us!" is probably unrealistic.

Note - I REALLY ran with a few vague statements you made and just drew sweeping conclusions. If they are unwarranted, I apologize. But I'm leaving them in just in case they are useful. I was prone to the same thing when I was younger. Still am, somewhat. But I know it's a dangerous instinct. The law is built on a very solid foundation. Desperately smart and committed people have put entire lifetimes into figuring this stuff out in the past. Learn it well, because that's what gives you the knowledge base to tinker with it when you're ready. It isn't a waste of your time to learn how and why it works the way it does right now, or even how and why it worked differently in the past. A lot of smart people did a lot of smart things before millennials and their non-hierarchical thinking came along. Don't be too quick to dismiss it.

 

I agree with you on most points but the work environment millenials grew up in is more unstable and more reliant on skill development than "finding a place". We aren't going to inherit the typical stay at your firm for life world since that model is disappearing. Firms are shifting towards having less equity partners as a % of the firm,  and more associates as employed lawyers, profit margins are thinning and non-lawyers are joining firms in larger numbers. Its looking more difficult for the junior who came in with an idea to make partner. This is just as every firm is trying to adapt to the legal tech shift, which is frightening because the people who will top it out are the partners still there. This isn't just true for law, e.g. a person could have made professor after a PhD in whatever two decades ago but that's no longer the case. 

Anyways with that said, I am still interested in working in the legal field but have talked to a lot of former lawyer friends who parachuted for a number of reasons. Some were at national firms and wanted flexibility, a family, etc or the type of work they are doing has started stagnating their skills/personal growth. I do see myself in the same situation down the line and I don't feel all that well about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Deadpool said:

Why did you go to law school? The issue I have with these types of questions is that you want to jump ship before you've even practiced law. Law school has very little to do with the practice of law itself. You seem to also be generalizing an entire field here in broad strokes. Not everyone is aiming for a Biglaw job in downtown Toronto, and these jobs represent only a fraction of legal jobs out there. 

I recommend reaching out to lawyers in different fields, practice areas, and firm sizes and having coffee chats with them about their work and daily lives. You may be pleasantly surprised. 

And who cares if other lawyers and students are going to disparage your career choice. This isn't high school anymore. You do what you want to do for yourself and no other reason should matter. 

You can certainly pursue an MBA but the work environment and culture in management consulting and finance is not all that different from law. You will also be competing for jobs with people who have STEM and business degrees and significant, and relevant, work experience. 

Canadian MBA degrees have become degree mills flooded with international students. I am not sold on how much value you can get out of them, especially if you are aiming for MBB firms like McKinsey, BCG, and Bain. 

Wanted a career where there is opportunity to effect some kind of societal change. Thought law was pretty good for that, but increasingly I am feeling its more supposed to be "reactive" to change, not pro-active. 

MBA programs are still fairly good, I disagree with the paper mill characterization. The management, social organizing and other skills I saw places like Rotman  UofT do was fascinating, e.g. studies and integration of behavioral science. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, mazzystar said:

Wanted a career where there is opportunity to effect some kind of societal change. Thought law was pretty good for that, but increasingly I am feeling its more supposed to be "reactive" to change, not pro-active. 

MBA programs are still fairly good, I disagree with the paper mill characterization. The management, social organizing and other skills I saw places like Rotman  UofT do was fascinating, e.g. studies and integration of behavioral science. 

Have you thought about government, legal aid, NGOs, public policy work, etc.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Deadpool said:

Have you thought about government, legal aid, NGOs, public policy work, etc.?

wrt government, I think OP may find a nice fit at the Ontario Securities Commission. Ticks a few of the boxes they are looking for. 

 

2 hours ago, mazzystar said:

I agree with you on most points but the work environment millenials grew up in is more unstable and more reliant on skill development than "finding a place". We aren't going to inherit the typical stay at your firm for life world since that model is disappearing. Firms are shifting towards having less equity partners as a % of the firm,  and more associates as employed lawyers, profit margins are thinning and non-lawyers are joining firms in larger numbers. Its looking more difficult for the junior who came in with an idea to make partner. This is just as every firm is trying to adapt to the legal tech shift, which is frightening because the people who will top it out are the partners still there. This isn't just true for law, e.g. a person could have made professor after a PhD in whatever two decades ago but that's no longer the case. 

Again, I think you are too focused on one small subsect of the legal industry. Many firms don't reflect this. 

And as far as PhDs are concerned, that's more an issue with a saturated field than anything. The world just doesn't need that many philosophy academics with the size of classrooms these days. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mazzy - You're not being annoying about this, so I'm going to give you the best advice I know how to give. And seriously, this is damn important advice. Please heed carefully.

The more you discuss this topic, the more different things you raise that seem to be priorities for you. By discussing what it would take to become an equity partner you are implicitly bringing up opportunities for progression and authority as well as money. I don't know quite where that fits with non-hierarchical values (I want to work somewhere without hierarchy now, but WITH hierarchy when I get to be on top of it?) but whatever. My point isn't to take issue with your priorities and values but rather to point out that you've raised a LOT of different things that you want and which are apparently important to you. Whether you pursue these things in law or outside of legal practice, the odds that you are going to find a position without difficult working hours, where your non-hierarchical contributions are fully appreciated, where you have the opportunity to effect social change, work unambiguously on the "good" side most of the time, have significant upwards potential, make a lot of money, etc. etc. etc. The notion that you'll find all of those things at once is pretty unreasonable.

Here's my point. I'm not trying to piss on your dreams, I'm just saying that compromises happen and are in most cases inevitable. No one gets everything. But I've noticed there are really two kinds of people out there, in terms of how folks pursue their careers. The first group thinks carefully about what they are and are not willing to compromise on. The second group does not, and tries to pursue everything at once. BOTH groups end up compromising in the end, but the difference is that when you think carefully about your priorities you can compromise strategically - the odds are good you'll at least compromise on things you can live without and end up with the things that are really important to you. When you don't do that, you still compromise, but in ways that are forced on you by circumstances. And the odds that you'll end up compromising in ways you can live with, and still get the things most important to you, are much lower.

I'm not saying give up on everything entirely. For example, money for me was not a priority - not past a reasonable middle-class income. Somehow, through hard work and being good at what I do, the money eventually came anyway. Maybe that'll work for you too. But start on a foundation of your most important values and build out from there. Do NOT chase everything at once.

Hope that helps.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, mazzystar said:

I contemplated going into criminal law or enforcement, not sure about the prosecutor route since they get a lot of flack (e.g. lots of lawyers/students disparaging how all they do is lock up minorities for non-violent offenses). I am interested in forensics, very technical crimes or ones with a strong psychological element though.

Let's PM. In the same position as you, but I studied forensics in undergrad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, mazzystar said:

I contemplated going into criminal law or enforcement, not sure about the prosecutor route since they get a lot of flack (e.g. lots of lawyers/students disparaging how all they do is lock up minorities for non-violent offenses). I am interested in forensics, very technical crimes or ones with a strong psychological element though.

 

5 hours ago, mazzystar said:

Its not my view of defense or crown. I am fairly neutral and don't hold these extreme views of it. I have talked to prosecutors, they are fairly socially progressive and I am at odds with some of the comments I here about them. I am still considering the option for criminal law and lean heavily towards joining an enforcement agency. 

So @mazzystar please no offense is intended, but you're kind of all over the map here.  You maybe want to do an MBA and do management consulting, but that doesn't really mesh with wanting to effect social change.  You also mention working in law enforcement, which doesn't particularly mesh with doing an MBA.

Of course as a Crown I deal with a lot of enforcement agencies.  Primarily police of course, but I've dealt with Fish & Wildlife, Commercial Vehicles, CBSA, railway cops, Corrections, Sheriffs... you name it.  ANd I've had a lot of really positive interactions with those officers.

But I do want you to know - I don't think a law degree is going to be highly valued in most enforcement agencies.  That's different from saying a law degree wouldn't be useful in doing law enforcement - I think it would be.  But based on conversations with people that had law degrees and worked in law enforcement, I don't think their superiors valued that particular combination.

Also of course law enforcement is incredibly hierarchical! There are ranks, uniforms, the whole nine yards.

Law enforcement is however a very rewarding career in terms of being able to make a difference to real people.  It also has good if not stellar pay, good benefits, and for police in particular you're able to retire quite early and still pursue other interests.

So, You're so all over I don't know that I can give you any general advice about what to do, whether to continue or drop out, or what path to pursue if you do.  But I thought I would pass on this information about law enforcement careers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Malicious Prosecutor said:

You maybe want to do an MBA and do management consulting, but that doesn't really mesh with wanting to effect social change. 

Sorry @Malicious Prosecutor but this is a pretty ignorant comment. Almost similar to that poster who said the criminal justice system is just a competition (or whatever they actually said).

Yes, not all firms and consulting and businesses give a rat's ass about social change and progress. In fact, most still don't. But there certainly is a trend in business (and especially consulting when it comes to sustainability) to move away from outdated ideas of how to run a successful business, and what businesses should be striving to do. This isn't some tiny area of the field. It's a decently sized wave that began to really gain momentum in the 90s and has only grown stronger today. An MBA could be useful for such a career depending on where you get it, what skills they teach you, and (ultimately) what you choose to do with it.

Yes most people with an MBA try to get into the elite firms and ibanking, similar to how most law students want to get onto bay street. But there are paths out there for MBA skills (especially if the person focuses on gaining quantitative skills too) to be applied with this social progress idea in mind.

It's just... not as easy. Yes, exactly just how it's not as easy to do it in law. So I think @mazzystar needs to come to grips with the fact that neither in law nor business is this the "norm" yet, and the market has the jobs that traditionally dominated the market still. It may take time to get to where you ultimately want to be (yes, most people end up doing this, contrary to popular belief) but if you want it enough you can get there - either in law or business.

so the question should be if they want to lose out on two (?) Years of legal education already completed, plus another in an MBA (assuming you can get in without work experience, which is rare), only to potentially end up in the same spot - struggle landing the "perfect" job right away.

my guess is you can do better sticking with law, finding jobs that aren't perfect but check off some boxes (as @Diplock said) and keep an eye to where you eventually want to be. You can eventually get there, probably. You may even do an MBA after a few years of legal practice and transition into a consultancy role then in a niche area (in fact, I know a lawyer who did just that).

Patience is key here I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Diplock said:

@Mazzy - You're not being annoying about this, so I'm going to give you the best advice I know how to give. And seriously, this is damn important advice. Please heed carefully.

Here's my point. I'm not trying to piss on your dreams, I'm just saying that compromises happen and are in most cases inevitable. No one gets everything. But I've noticed there are really two kinds of people out there, in terms of how folks pursue their careers. The first group thinks carefully about what they are and are not willing to compromise on. The second group does not, and tries to pursue everything at once. BOTH groups end up compromising in the end, but the difference is that when you think carefully about your priorities you can compromise strategically - the odds are good you'll at least compromise on things you can live without and end up with the things that are really important to you. When you don't do that, you still compromise, but in ways that are forced on you by circumstances. And the odds that you'll end up compromising in ways you can live with, and still get the things most important to you, are much lower.

I'm not saying give up on everything entirely. For example, money for me was not a priority - not past a reasonable middle-class income. Somehow, through hard work and being good at what I do, the money eventually came anyway. Maybe that'll work for you too. But start on a foundation of your most important values and build out from there. Do NOT chase everything at once.

Hope that helps.

Hey, I get it and appreciate the feedback, honestly all of its worthwhile. I don't care for having a "dreamjob" or a perfect thing. Only something I enjoy. I have an end-goal on where I want to be, which is to be part of the economic transformation we will be forced into by climate change. It will impact every one of us in a 1-2 decades, and I am jaded about law being the appropriate route to pursue this. When I talk to my friends in finance/economics/government policy jobs and they are all deeply concerned and very driven to learn more. The few lawyers I have talked to from Toronto sort of shut-down or demonstrate a very narrow, parochial view. It sort of makes sense since the field is about knowing technical rules and the career progression pathway encourages straitjacketing into a narrow domain. 

2 hours ago, Malicious Prosecutor said:

 

So @mazzystar please no offense is intended, but you're kind of all over the map here.  You maybe want to do an MBA and do management consulting, but that doesn't really mesh with wanting to effect social change.  You also mention working in law enforcement, which doesn't particularly mesh with doing an MBA.

Of course as a Crown I deal with a lot of enforcement agencies.  Primarily police of course, but I've dealt with Fish & Wildlife, Commercial Vehicles, CBSA, railway cops, Corrections, Sheriffs... you name it.  ANd I've had a lot of really positive interactions with those officers.

But I do want you to know - I don't think a law degree is going to be highly valued in most enforcement agencies.  That's different from saying a law degree wouldn't be useful in doing law enforcement - I think it would be.  But based on conversations with people that had law degrees and worked in law enforcement, I don't think their superiors valued that particular combination.

 

Maybe not law enforcement, you are right. Just weighing my options. I think a regulatory agency is worthwhile and thought about joining a securities regulator. I have a fairly decent foundation of economics and finance and would enjoy this type of work as it encompasses a combination of policy-setting & straight work. This overlaps with the area I am intending to work towards since this area is starting to see changes around it. 

I also sometimes get obsessed with detective/criminal profiling/forensic psychology  police procedurals so I sometimes imagine myself a hard-broiled detective catching serial killers. I enjoy criminal law courses more than any other too so that has something to do with it. 

59 minutes ago, pzabbythesecond said:

It's just... not as easy. Yes, exactly just how it's not as easy to do it in law. So I think @mazzystar needs to come to grips with the fact that neither in law nor business is this the "norm" yet, and the market has the jobs that traditionally dominated the market still. It may take time to get to where you ultimately want to be (yes, most people end up doing this, contrary to popular belief) but if you want it enough you can get there - either in law or business.

so the question should be if they want to lose out on two (?) Years of legal education already completed, plus another in an MBA (assuming you can get in without work experience, which is rare), only to potentially end up in the same spot - struggle landing the "perfect" job right away.

my guess is you can do better sticking with law, finding jobs that aren't perfect but check off some boxes (as @Diplock said) and keep an eye to where you eventually want to be. You can eventually get there, probably. You may even do an MBA after a few years of legal practice and transition into a consultancy role then in a niche area (in fact, I know a lawyer who did just that).

Patience is key here I think.

Law jobs and MBA jobs are fundamentally different and you can do much more with an MBA. Part of it is motivated by how I perceive the field. Its fairly static, non-proactive and does not encourage lateral skill progression.  Law has an unusually low concentration of big-thinkers outside of academia. An MBA is fundamentally skill-driven and has wider breadth and  the programs I looked into seem to try to encourage multidisciplinary thinking. 

Edited by mazzystar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@mazzy - Okay, at this point I'll wish you good luck. But you know, you really need to find a way of describing what you want, and what are trying to avoid, in terms that do not suggest you think the legal profession is too small-minded to accommodate your genius and the vast impact you plan on having in the world. The terms in which you are engaging here are unavoidably insulting to just about everyone practicing law, and self-aggrandizing in terms of your ambitions to an almost comical degree. The last advice I would give you is this. I truly and genuinely think you are looking for everything at once (which is dangerous, see above) but if I had to pull out one general theme it would be that you want power. You want to make an impact. And you don't want to wait to develop knowledge and seniority in your field, necessarily. You want people to listen to you now.

I'd encourage you to consider whether that's realistic in any field. Leaving aside tech entrepreneurs and people who manage to be in charge at a young age mainly because they own whatever they are in charge of, no one is welcoming 20-somethings into any profession and saying "please tell us what you think we should be doing here, because we don't have a clue!" And again, maybe I'm starting to sound like an old man here, but there's a difference between seeking a profession where you feel there's room to learn and grow into a leader (which is rational) and seeking a profession where you get to start calling the shots before you learn where the bathrooms are located (which is obviously not rational).

I've been practicing law long enough that I have literally seen several distinct waves of graduates, each of them swearing up and down that theirs would be the generation that breaks everything, reforms everything, and that dinosaurs like me would be begging to work for them in whatever kind of gig-economy-machine-learning-driven-blockchain-empowered-megalaw-application they end up conquering the world with. Now to give you some credit, you are at least sort of giving up on law entirely. You don't think you're going to conquer it. You just think ... I don't know, that it's too broken a vehicle to do anything with at all. And maybe that's true if you want to reform the world. But I'm not aware the kind of transformation you're talking about has an identifiable profession. There are people who are doing it, no question. But there isn't a specific credential that gets you there. And quite a fair percentage of the people leading change at that level are lawyers too. Generally not fresh out of law school.

Anyway, good luck.

Edited by Diplock
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Diplock said:

@mazzy - Okay, at this point I'll wish you good luck. But you know, you really need to find a way of describing what you want, and what are trying to avoid, in terms that do not suggest you think the legal profession is too small-minded to accommodate your genius and the vast impact you plan on having in the world. The terms in which you are engaging here are unavoidably insulting to just about everyone practicing law, and self-aggrandizing in terms of your ambitions to an almost comical degree. The last advice I would give you is this. I truly and genuinely think you are looking for everything at once (which is dangerous, see above) but if I had to pull out one general theme it would be that you want power. You want to make an impact. And you don't want to wait to develop knowledge and seniority in your field, necessarily. You want people to listen to you now.

Anyway, good luck.

This is not what I mean at all. I am sorry you implied I did. I've worked technical jobs in the past and seen first-hand that a career route requires knowing more deeply about one area, and the tops will be the people with extensive expertise on one subject. I didn't really read into your thing about blockchains or world conquest or whatever. You seem to be just characterizing me as the typical overtly ambitious tech types, which I am not. 

I still really do enjoy law and don't dismiss anything I've learned, highly respect the people working in social justice and deep issues in law. I respect the people in criminal law, for the most part, and appreciate it. My complaints are focused on the private law sector mostly, just on the career progression pathways and  organizational structure of legal services, and the fact that one is expected to be domain specific in their practice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Deadpool said:

Have you thought about government, legal aid, NGOs, public policy work, etc.?

Yes. I am weighing towards working within public policy, more than anything. I just wanted to keep my options open for good exit opportunities and an MBA sort of offers that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last reply. I think you're flailing around here with a variety of frustrations and concerns about the legal profession. And I think you're going to need to refine what you're talking about a lot before you'll be able to do anything with it. But for whatever it's worth, you're at least participating maturely in a conversation about it. I came at you pretty hard, as have others, and you've responded well. That says a lot.

Try not to make any permanent decisions until you spend time thinking carefully about this stuff. But as you have new ideas, feel free to bounce them off people here. Folks will give you almost endless time on this site as long as you aren't being ridiculous, and you're not being ridiculous. Confused maybe, but that's not the same thing.

Yeah and that gig-economy-machine-learning-driven-blockchain-empowered-megalaw-application thing was meant to be a joke. There's always a hook for why the old stuff doesn't work anymore and why everything is going to change. This is just me making fun of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, mazzystar said:

Yes. I am weighing towards working within public policy, more than anything. I just wanted to keep my options open for good exit opportunities and an MBA sort of offers that. 

Are you so jaded that you are not able to put up with another year of law school, graduate and then get into public policy? MBA is another $80-100k if you are thinking along the lines of Queens/Ivey/Schulich/Rotman, unless your UG was biz and you can do a 1 year accelerated MBA. I would think your law degree would be able to get you into public policy... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, levin said:

Are you so jaded that you are not able to put up with another year of law school, graduate and then get into public policy? MBA is another $80-100k if you are thinking along the lines of Queens/Ivey/Schulich/Rotman, unless your UG was biz and you can do a 1 year accelerated MBA. I would think your law degree would be able to get you into public policy... 

I like three of my classes, but two mandatories are really just mind numbing and I was sort of at a low point at reading week. I wouldn't do so now as I like the people around me and still think the JD Advantage is still useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...