Are you a midlevel BigLaw associate who’s been trying to move in-house for many months? Maybe over a year, even? As hiring across the legal market has slowed down a bit over the past couple of years, many corporate and transactional associates have found it harder than expected to make the jump in-house.
That might surprise you — after all, isn’t going in-house supposed to be the easier path for corporate associates? It’s true that corporate attorneys tend to have more opportunities than their litigation peers. But even for deal lawyers, the path to an in-house role is rarely as smooth or straightforward as people assume. There are structural challenges in today’s market that make the move slower and more competitive than it once was.
Let’s look at why that is — and why, in some cases, it might make sense to lateral to another firm first before making that long-term in-house move.
Why It’s Harder Than You Think to Go In-House as a Midlevel
First, there is the reality that most in-house openings do not go through recruiters like myself. They’re filled through other channels:
Existing outside counsel relationships. Many companies hire directly from the firms that already represent them.
Secondment programs. These short-term placements often lead to full-time offers.
Internal referrals. Many in-house openings go to lawyers who already have in-house experience.
That last group — attorneys already working in-house — has grown substantially. Many of them stay longer than expected because advancement in-house tends to be slower and less structured than in a firm environment. At a law firm, the elevation points are clear: Junior Associate to Midlevel Associate to Senior Associate to Counsel to Partner, etc.. In-house, the structure is flatter, and promotions are less automatic.
The result: a crowded pool of experienced candidates for every in-house opening.
So, if you’re a 4th or 5th year corporate associate who’s been trying to go in-house without success, you’re not doing anything wrong. You’re just up against limited openings, steep competition, and a hiring market that often prefers candidates who’ve already made the jump.
That’s why for many associates, a strategic lateral move to another firm first can actually be a good decision— not a detour, but a bridge to your ultimate goal.
Why a Lateral Move Might Be the Right Move
Lateralling to another BigLaw (or strong mid-market) firm as a midlevel associate can open up new doors — both immediately and over the long term. Here are five reasons why that might make sense if your in-house search has stalled.
1. Your client base doesn’t match your target industry.
Think carefully about where you ultimately want to go in-house — and whether your current firm’s clients align with that world.
For example: you may be representing financial services clients in your current corporate practice, but your goal is to work in-house at a tech or life sciences company. That mismatch makes it difficult to get noticed by hiring managers in the industries you actually want to join.
Why? Because the most common path in-house starts with client relationships. Companies often hire directly from their outside counsel. When a new role opens, the GC or Deputy GC often reaches out to their trusted outside partner at a law firm asking, “Do you have anyone great on your team who might be interested?”
If your firm’s client base doesn’t include those types of companies, you’re missing that crucial pipeline.
By contrast, moving to a firm whose client list includes your target industries can give you much stronger exposure and credibility. You’ll work on the kinds of matters those companies actually handle — and you’ll build relationships that can lead directly to an in-house opportunity later.
2. Your current practice doesn’t match well to in-house practice needs.
Not all corporate experience translates equally well once you move inside a company.
Many corporate associates spend their years as “deal runners” — working on teams and eventually managing those deal teams for M&A, capital markets, or private equity transactions. That work is valuable, but it’s not what most in-house lawyers actually do on a daily basis.
In-house counsel manage deals but don’t typically execute them in detail — that’s what outside counsel are for. The internal legal team’s focus is more on areas like:
Day-to-day commercial contract negotiation
Vendor and customer agreements
Data privacy, marketing, and regulatory issues
Corporate governance and compliance
Internal stakeholder advising (HR, finance, product, etc.)
If your entire resume is "deal running"-heavy, it may be difficult to convince an in-house employer that you are experienced in the variety and volume of work that comes with being an internal legal corporate generalist.
Sometimes you can broaden your experience at your current firm — but not always. Some firms simply don’t have the mix of work to offer that kind of exposure. If that’s the case, a lateral move can be a strategic move— a way to join a firm or practice group that gives you more relevant experience before you eventually move in-house.
3. You’re in the wrong geography.
This one’s simple but critical: location still matters.
If you’re in New York but trying to move in-house in Boston, Chicago, or San Francisco, that transition is much easier if you’re already based there.
While BigLaw practices have become increasingly nationalized, the in-house market remains local at its core. Companies tend to hire new in-house lawyers from law firms and other companies in their region. Partners in those local law firm offices usually have deeper, more personal relationships with the local business community. A Boston biotech company is more likely to hire an associate from a Boston firm than from a New York one. The same holds true in other markets.
If you know you want to end up in a particular city or industry hub, lateralling to a firm in that geography can be the most direct step toward building those connections and increasing your visibility with local clients.
4. Your current group doesn’t have the right connections to in-house openings.
Not every BigLaw practice or working group is equally well-connected to the in-house world.
You might be in a respected practice doing great work, but if your clients keep their legal departments extremely lean — or rarely hire from their outside firms — your exposure to in-house opportunities will be limited. Some companies simply don’t hire much in-house. Others have low turnover and small legal teams.
That’s not a reflection on your ability. It’s a structural limitation.
By contrast, joining a firm or practice group that’s known for being a “feeder” to in-house roles can make a huge difference. Those partners have clients who actively hire, and those clients trust them enough to ask for referrals when they do.
If your current group doesn’t have those connections, lateralling may be the most practical way to get closer to your long-term goal.
5. More time in practice will strengthen your in-house marketability.
Finally, it’s worth remembering that in-house roles are incredibly competitive, and hiring managers tend to favor attorneys who have a lot of experience and can operate independently.
If you look closely at in-house job postings, you’ll notice a pattern: even when the listing says “4+ years of experience,” the person who actually gets the job often has 6, 7, or 8 years.
That’s because companies want lawyers who can jump in with minimal hand-holding.
If you’re a 4th or 5th year associate, you might simply be a bit early. And that’s okay. Spending another year or two in private practice — ideally in a setting that builds the right skills and relationships — can make you a much stronger candidate when you try again.
A lateral move at this stage can also help you reposition your brand: new firm, new client base, new story. That’s often what separates the candidates who eventually land in-house from those who keep getting close.
When you’re deep in the BigLaw grind — the long hours, the late-night closings, the endless doc review — it’s easy to think that going in-house is the magic answer. And for many lawyers, it does bring a welcome change: more predictable hours, a closer connection to the business, and new kinds of challenges.
But timing and positioning matter just as much as the desire to move. The in-house market is tighter than ever, and the most successful transitions happen when you’re intentional about when and how you make that move.
A lateral move doesn’t mean you’ve failed to go in-house. It can actually be the smartest intermediate step — one that positions you to succeed when the right opportunity arises.
If you’ve been targeting in-house roles with little progress, take a step back and ask:
Does my current client base align with my target industries?
Am I getting experience relevant to what in-house counsel actually do?
Am I in the right geography for my long-term goals?
Does my practice group have meaningful in-house connections?
Would a carefully chosen lateral move actually accelerate, not delay, my path?
If you answered “no” to one or more of those questions, it’s worth exploring what a lateral move could do for your career trajectory.
If you’re a midlevel corporate associate — a 4th, 5th or 6th year — who’s been trying to move in-house without traction, don’t get discouraged. Take a moment, reassess your positioning, and consider whether one more strategic firm move could get you where you want to go faster.
