Key Takeaways
Legal careers are becoming increasingly fluid, with lawyers moving more freely between private practice and in-house roles than in previous generations. In this Modern Counsel op-ed, Nathan Peart and Elena Bajada examine the forces driving this shift and why commercial judgment is becoming as important as technical legal expertise.
- Lawyers continue to move in-house for greater business exposure, while a growing number of in-house counsel are returning to private practice.
- Successful in-house lawyers are expected to provide practical, business-focused recommendations, not just legal analysis.
- Compensation remains a key consideration, but many lawyers view in-house roles as a long-term investment offering leadership opportunities and strategic influence.
- Law firms increasingly value former in-house lawyers for their client-side perspective, commercial credibility, and understanding of how legal services are evaluated and purchased.
- The legal market is placing greater value on lawyers who combine technical excellence with commercial judgment, making non-linear career paths more common and more attractive.
The traditional path between private practice and in-house legal departments is becoming increasingly fluid on both sides of the Atlantic. Lawyers continue to move into corporate legal teams in search of broader commercial influence and closer proximity to the business. At the same time, an increasingly visible number of in-house lawyers are returning to private practice, bringing with them something law firms value highly: first-hand experience of how clients make decisions, allocate legal work and assess their external advisers.
There has been a long-held view that the move in-house was largely a one-way journey. Today, however, those career choices are becoming less linear as organizations increasingly value commercial judgement alongside technical expertise when hiring.
In-House isn’t easier
The traditional narrative presents an in-house move as an escape from demanding law firm hours and an opportunity to achieve better work-life balance. While that may form part of an individual's motivation, it isn’t a complete picture.
In-house legal departments are typically lean, and their lawyers operate without the extensive support infrastructure at large firms and are expected to advise across a far broader range of issues. They must determine which questions require detailed legal analysis, which can be resolved pragmatically, and which risks the business can reasonably accept.
While technical excellence remains essential, successful in-house lawyers must now also be able to translate legal advice into commercial outcomes, communicate effectively with non-lawyers and provide clear recommendations rather than simply presenting every available option.
From an in-house perspective, this distinction has become one of the defining characteristics of exceptional in-house lawyers. Time and again, we see organizations appoint the lawyer who can translate complex legal issues into clear commercial recommendations, rather than the individual who simply demonstrates the strongest technical legal analysis. Today's General Counsel and legal leaders are expected to both identify legal risk and help the business navigate it confidently. Commercial judgement is every bit as important as technical excellence.
That expectation is only increasing: Thomson Reuters' 2025 State of the Corporate Law Department Report found that General Counsel are placing greater emphasis on demonstrating the value delivered by their teams, while also managing cost pressures, technological change and increasing organizational complexity.
Practice areas vary
The feasibility and stage of moving in-house often depends on a combination of sector, practice area and seniority.
Private equity funds, investment managers and other transaction-led organizations frequently recruit directly from leading law firms. Their legal teams value lawyers who can execute sophisticated transactions at pace, understand sponsor expectations and operate comfortably in high-intensity environments.
However, within multinational manufacturers, retailers and consumer businesses, senior legal leaders often oversee matters ranging from governance and commercial contracts to employment, investigations, regulatory risk and disputes. Organizations recruiting into these positions frequently favor candidates who have already worked in-house and can demonstrate good judgement, stakeholder management and operational leadership.
Certain specialist disciplines, including employment, privacy and data protection, often provide natural entry points because businesses require sustained internal expertise. Geography also matters, as US-qualified lawyers considering opportunities in Europe are most likely to find demand within businesses with significant US operations, US-listed companies and private capital-backed organizations.
Compensation counts
For associates at leading US firms, the financial equation has changed in the past few years. Base salaries, bonuses and sign-on packages have all increased in recent years at law firms, making the decision to move in-house a tougher financial decision than it once was.
Many lawyers do accept that an in-house move represents a different long-term investment, understanding that immediate cash compensation may reduce, but broader incentives such as equity participation, long-term incentive plans and meaningful leadership opportunities can narrow the salary gap over time. An in-house career can also provide exposure to boards, executive committees and strategic decision-making that may not otherwise come until much later in a lawyer’s career.
Back to private practice
Perhaps the more interesting development in recent years is movement in the opposite direction.
Senior in-house lawyers, including former General Counsel, are increasingly being considered for partnership at leading law firms. Their value extends beyond technical expertise and into commercial credibility. Former in-house leaders understand how clients choose advisers, how legal services are purchased and what differentiates exceptional external counsel from merely competent advisers.
Partnership still demands business development and the ability to build a sustainable practice. Firms therefore look beyond technical excellence to candidates who can articulate a compelling reason for returning to private practice and demonstrate the commercial drive to succeed.
What the market says
The story is less about the volume of moves and more about the direction of travel. Major, Lindsey & Africa's market intelligence suggests that moves from senior in-house legal roles back into private practice remain a relatively small proportion of overall lateral hiring, but are increasing by a percentage point year-on-year.
From a private practice perspective, we are seeing firms become increasingly receptive to candidates who combine technical expertise with deep sector knowledge, commercial credibility and first-hand client experience. This is especially true in sectors like AI and data centers. While it’s a slow shift, as opposed to a dramatic one, it reflects a broader recognition that legal careers are becoming more fluid on both sides of the Atlantic.
Legal careers grow fluid
The strongest lawyers on either side of the profession increasingly share the same characteristics: commercial judgement, adaptability, relationship-building skills and the ability to communicate complex issues clearly.
Private practice develops analytical discipline and technical depth, while in-house careers develop institutional knowledge, commercial prioritization and accountability for business outcomes. Neither environment is inherently more demanding than the other: they simply develop different capabilities.
As careers become longer and less linear, movement between private practice and in-house legal teams is likely to become increasingly common. Organizations are placing greater value on lawyers who combine technical excellence with commercial judgement, while law firms increasingly recognize the strategic advantage of partners who understand life from the client's side of the table.
In our view, the profession ultimately benefits from greater movement between private practice and in-house legal teams. The strongest lawyers increasingly combine the technical discipline of private practice with the commercial perspective developed in-house, experiences which are complementary rather than competing. Businesses benefit from advisers who understand commercial realities, while law firms gain partners who appreciate how clients make decisions and what they truly value from their external counsel.
As legal careers continue to evolve, the breadth of experience a lawyer brings may become every bit as valuable as the path they took to acquire it.
