Pros
Managing attorneys are so absorbed by the requirement to generate large amounts of billing that they have very little time left over for micromanagement, which inadvertently allows the associates some degree of freedom and comfort in their handling of files. Files are paperless and can be accessed anywhere. Founding partner seems engaged by modern ideas. Low, easily met expectations for knowledge and skill of associates. It is basically easy to work there because the managing attorneys do not set a high bar for their own quality of work and did not leave themselves time to engage with employees on more than a superficial level. All of these qualities made the job less stressful than some other firms I have worked for.
Cons
As several other reviewers have said, the firm strongly asserts itself during interview process as a "work-life balance" firm; however, this is far from the truth. The founding partner is extremely ambitious and grew the firm from just a few offices to having locations in several states and having their own proprietary case management software. Rapid growth and expansion is expensive and hurts short-term profitability (with satellite offices in Kansas, Nevada, and Hawaii contributing little to revenue while employing attorneys who do not have enough work to generate billing). The management then approaches attorneys at profitable office locations and asks them to empathize with the firm for low profitability, suggesting that their minimum billable quotas be increased, that raises be foregone year after year, and that cuts be allowed to various lifestyle expenses. Management regularly advises attorneys at profitable offices that the firm operates at little to no profit overall, to explain why billable requirements inevitably will rise in order to accommodate requests for regular raises. Responsibility for every negative decision by management is shirked off by local managers onto unseen, invisible partners from other locations, while credit is taken for any policy improvements (which were few and far-between). Policy changes for the firm are not well thought-out and announced in writing, but instead are alluded to and commented upon in various verbal meetings, are ambiguous, and never seem finalized. Policies themselves, as a result of not being reduced to writing, come across as amorphous and are applied post-facto as it pleases management, to discourage any behaviors that hurt the bottom line of the firm, no matter how petty. Management repeatedly drafts the highest-billing attorneys for promotions, without regard for other considerations, whether it be quality of education, quality of character, or quality of work. Although the founding partner seems to be cool, magnetic, and attractive, he is disengaged. He does not do legal work to get a sense of what it is like to use company software and meet company expectations. He also is doing post-graduate schooling and traveling and cannot respond to company concerns, instead delegating all power to a non-attorney "comptroller" who is the de facto leader of the firm.