In the first of our series of interviews with lawyers practising and non-practis ing, we speak with an in-house lawyer

to find out their view of the world, legal , careers and beyond. What made you choose a career in law? For similar reasons to most people I suspect. I was mindful that it is a well-pa id industry, which is not a very inspiring reason to choose an industry but its d ifficult to ignore practicalities entirely when setting out on a career. Primari ly though, my skill set was reasonably well suited to it I am better with words than with numbers, I enjoy drafting written communications and analysing and pre senting arguments. What did you really want to do, if you could have done anything? In truth, I never saw a long-term career in the law. I saw it as a launch pad fo r other things. I remember people saying that you cant go wrong with the law beca use it exposes you to so many other industries and that, in time, it will be eas y to make the step out. There is certainly some truth to that but, in some respe cts, I think a finance background will often make for an easier transition into a business role. I really wanted to be part of an exciting industry in a deal-making role. I w anted to be the person that does the deal much more than the lawyer who records the deal. As it turns out, my non-legal involvement and input has increased but Im still a lawyer principally. I heard someone say recently that in being an in-house lawye r, they considered themselves a business person who considers legal issues rathe r than the other way round. That sounds about right to me too. How did your career path lead you to working in-house? Due to a connection, I was offered a position in-house when I had only been in p rivate practice for a couple of years. At the time, I was still quite young and I was the companys first lawyer, so there were some anxious moments early on. But in many respects, moving in-house came as a great relief. I was much more certa in about my business acumen than my technical legal abilities. In-house life is more about finding commercial solutions rather than being right about the law al l of the time. Thats not to say that the business doesnt look to you to be legally accurate in your review of a position it certainly does. But its guiding the bus iness on whether to stick or twist which is the most exciting, rewarding and dif ficult aspect of the job. What is your current role? Given I work in a small legal team, its a healthy mixture of contractual issues, litigation, regulatory review and business administration, which may include mat ters which are entirely unrelated to the law. By way of example, Im often asked t o review key internal and external communications, regardless of whether there i s a legal angle. Ill also get involved in deals at a very early stage to sense-ch eck some aspects of the proposal. I suspect roles can be more specialised in bigger in-house legal teams but I fin d the mixture of work to be a saving grace. I dont want to be working exclusively on one contract or one piece of litigation for weeks or months on end. What sort of things do you do on an average day? Well, an average day is probably the equivalent of 8 billable hours. So its a sol

id day but you are much better able to organise your own day and your own work l oad than in private practice. I make sure Im out and about seeing the business. Wherever possible, I make sure I go and see people rather than call them or email them. Ultimately, I do that b ecause it makes my job easier you get better information when you see someone in person but it will help on many other fronts as well. What about a non-average day?! I could be travelling for the day, in a client meeting, in court, dealing with a n urgent issue that doesnt allow time for anything else.anything really. What skills from your private practice days do you still use today and what have you had to learn as a result of being in-house counsel? You still need to keep clients happy. Its just that your clients are now manageme nt and employees of the business. If they dont want to use you and dont see the va lue in involving you, then the whole thing doesnt work. You need to remain mindful of commercial realities. In private practice, theres n o point filling time-sheets with work that will just be written-off. In-house, y ou need to be spending time on the stuff that matters and spending the companys m oney on external legal advice that is effective and addresses key risks. Ive learnt that approachability is crucial to the success of an in-house lawyer. Ive also learnt to make a decision and move on quickly you have to make a lot of them and it is not constructive to dwell on something when you have already appl ied your best judgment based on the information available. In your experience, and obviously this must vary per employer, does working in-h ouse offer flexible working and a good work / life balance, particularly for tho se employees with kids? Essentially, yes. Late nights are a rarity and businesses are more open to home working and other flexible arrangements. There is less of a culture of needing t o be seen at your desk and more of a culture of being judged by your output and effectiveness. So, that all lends itself to a better work/life balance. If someone was considering leaving private practice and moving in-house, are the re any practical steps you could recommend to help them? If theyre absolutely clear on which industry they want to work in, then consider working in that industry as a non-lawyer for a period of time. It will help with knowledge, contacts, industry lingo and ultimately, when you do land the positi on, will make you a far more effective lawyer. If that is not an option, then most industries have training certificates/basic credentials that can be undertaken relatively cheaply and quickly. Your industry knowledge will improve as a result but, more to the point, it will evidence a d esire to be involved in the industry, which potential employers will appreciate. Clients of your current law firm are rich ground for potential in-house moves bu t obviously that needs to be handled delicately. Is in-house a good alternative for lawyers who think that perhaps a legal career (in any form) may not be for them? I certainly think it is. It is too simplistic to say that being in-house is the best of both worlds, because not everyone finds that. But the less your role is

exclusively about the law, the more you might find yourself enjoying the law. http://www.beyondthepinstripe.com/2012/10/10/in-house-counsel-stripped-bare/