In a 2008 essay for The New Lawyer, Susan Robinson shared the advice that she had been giving to Stanford Law graduates as they embarked on their careers as law firm associates:

Be introspective and decide what course you want for your law career. Make sure that you are the “go-to” associate at the law firm. Build your network. The most important step in expanding your opportunities is spending time on meeting people and developing relationships. Attend events, both in the firm and outside of it.

It was sound advice for an anxious time, just before the peak of the Great Recession. In a 2009 Stanford Lawyer article, Robinson spoke to the drastic cuts in law firm hiring. “An example is one big firm that two years ago offered 50 spots for the summer. Last year it cut back to about 40. This year it’s down to 20. So, we have the same number of students chasing after many fewer summer opportunities,” she said.

Today, there is a similar level of anxiety, but this time it’s in response to the potential for AI to limit the number of associate positions at law firms. Once again, Robinson’s sage advice resonates with graduating law students.

Robinson has overseen the Office of Career Services for nearly 30 years, managing all aspects of career counseling, programming, and recruiting for students and alumni, while working closely with legal employers to understand their evolving needs.

She developed and taught Leadership and Influence Skills for Lawyers with Michelle Galloway, JD ’89 (BA ’87), a course that focuses on the professional skills lawyers need beyond legal analysis—including team dynamics, effective communication, client development, and understanding the business of law practice. Her teaching draws on her interests in neuroleadership research and its application to professional development in legal settings.

Her expertise extends beyond Stanford through her active involvement in national recruiting initiatives. She has served on the National Association for Law Placement (NALP) board of directors and is a past president of the Bay Area Legal Recruitment Association. Her committee work with NALP has been extensive, including chairing the Diversity Pipeline Initiative and serving on the Recruitment Practice, Alternative Careers, and Hiring Guidelines Task Force committees.

Before joining Stanford, she practiced employment law at Heller Ehrman and civil litigation at Farella Braun + Martel LLP in San Francisco, giving her firsthand insight into the skills and qualities that legal employers seek.

Robinson retired from Stanford Law in August 2026. Here, she shares her deep expertise in the legal profession and career services in a conversation with George Triantis, JSD ’89, Richard E. Lang Professor of Law and Dean—discussing pressures on students and the profession, forces of change, and how Stanford Law is preparing its graduates to meet those changes. — by Sharon Driscoll

---

George Triantis: You’ve seen the law school—and the profession—evolve in so many ways during your three-decade career here. With your retirement, this is a great opportunity to ask you about your insights and your recollections. I’d like to start with the profession, because you’ve been very closely involved with it and a close observer of it. What are some of the significant changes that you’ve noticed?

Susan Robinson: The industry has changed dramatically, particularly on the private-sector side, which has been my focus. When I started in the late ’90s at Stanford, the legal market was still primarily regional. So, it was a huge decision where you were going to be geographically. If you were interested in L.A., you’d talk to Gibson or Latham. In D.C., you’d talk to Covington or Wilmer Cutler, as it was then known. There were regional powerhouses, and it was fairly rare for a firm to have multiple offices. Today, if you were to ask most students or young alumni to name the location of the main office of a big law firm, they couldn’t. They couldn’t tell you that Gibson came out of L.A., for example. Firms now are not just national, they’re international, and that has had a significant impact in terms of students and alumni thinking about their careers. So, 20 or 30 years ago, you’d pick a firm; it would be in a particular region and the likelihood that you would leave that firm was fairly small. You might leave it to go in-house eventually, but the expectation was that you were choosing your long-term career. And moving was a big deal because you would have to pick a new firm that was aware of your old firm. It was complicated. Students today can select a firm and an office and can start working in that firm; they can fairly easily make a lateral move to shift to another office, or to another firm, because these are firms that have national presence and national awareness. Today, things are more flexible for lawyers in terms of their careers.

 

Another significant change I’ve seen is the expansion of practice areas that are available in each market. It used to be that if you wanted to do regulatory work, you went to D.C. If you wanted to do privacy work, it was centered in a particular location, and so on. Now that has expanded so most of the practice areas are in most of the major legal markets in the country. That again makes it easier for attorneys to match up geographically where they want to be with the type of practice they want to have.

The other major trend that I’ve seen is that firms have gotten much larger. When I started, a large law firm was any firm that had more than 100 attorneys. That is viewed as a smaller law firm now. And they have really shifted pretty heavily toward early specialization for associates. The practice in the late ’90s was that you were a litigator, you were a corporate lawyer, you were a regulatory lawyer and would do a smattering of all those things. Now, the expectation is that you will specialize fairly early as an associate. The model in terms of firms selling their services is all about specialists—in data privacy or private equity, et cetera. So, that has put increased pressure on associates to figure out what it is they want to do earlier.

Looking ahead, how do you anticipate that will change?

I think the trends toward early specialization will continue, with increased pressure to do that earlier. But the biggest issue that I think firms are grappling with, that all industry is grappling with, is AI and how that’s going to change the look of law firms. I think firms are starting to experience significant pressure from their clients to use AI for basic-level tasks. If AI can do the task, it shouldn’t be done by an associate. And we’re at the early stages of that, but I think it’s going to really shift the makeup of at least Big Law. So, when you talk about how big law firms are structured, they have been in a pyramid shape, with a lot of associates at the bottom taking care of all the basic-level work and a small number of partners at the top. There is a sense that as they start shifting work to AI, they’re going to need fewer associates, and so this model may change from a pyramid to more of a rocket ship or a cylinder instead of a triangle. There’s a lot of talk that we’re moving in that direction and then what does that mean?

Most of our partners have become partners by training on the basics as associates. You do a bunch of document reviews, draft a bunch of briefs, and you become more experienced in the area so that you can be a strategic advisor, which is what firms want from their partners. If clients are only prepared to pay for the strategic advisors, how do you train the new ones? I don’t think firms quite know how they’re going to manage that yet.

Do you think it changes what they’re looking for in a new associate or what they will look for in a new associate in the next few years?

I think it will change what they’re looking for. We’re starting to see some of it already, but I think we’re going to see more of a shift in how firms recruit and whom they recruit. If you can’t train associates on basic tasks, then ideally what you want are people who come in at a higher level, people who are capable of doing maybe a third- or fourth-year associate’s work rather than the first couple of years. We have started to see firms place more emphasis on recruiting law students who have significant prior work experience. For example, a new associate may not yet be an expert on how to draft a brief but knows a client’s industry well. Firms are looking more and more at students who have worked in particular industries that match up to their clients or at students who have advanced degrees so that they understand a client’s business—an engineering degree, for example. I think they’re also placing greater emphasis on professional development skills—EQ, communication skills, strategic planning, analysis—all of the things that make the partners marketable. They’re looking for more of those skills right out of the gate.

And how have Stanford Law School’s students changed during your tenure?

We have seen an increasing number of students coming in with more work experience. About 66 percent, maybe we’re even closer to 70 percent now, are coming in with three or more years of work experience. That’s huge. We’ve also seen shifts in where they head post-graduation. When I first started, I’d say 6 to 7 percent would go into public interest government jobs at graduation. We’re now looking at more than double that. A lot of that has to do with the law school’s focus on creating fellowships and opportunities for students so they can start their careers in public interest, as opposed to maybe shifting later down the road. We’ve also seen a substantial increase in the number of graduates who clerk. In the late ’90s, it was maybe between 25 and 30 percent. We’re now consistently seeing 40 to 45 percent of the class clerking within a couple of years of graduating. And those clerkship experiences relate back to that idea of having more experience before you start with a firm. Having worked with a judge and then working at a firm or public interest organization, you’ll know what’s going to bother that judge in your briefs, right?

You’ve been a key member of the law school and have seen it change, both in terms of curriculum and extracurricular programs. What notable changes stand out over the last 30 years?

Stanford has made some really significant changes that I think put our students in a better position to enter the market. The expansion of our clinical programs is an important one. When I started, I think we had four clinics. Today, there are 11—enough for every single one of our students to take a clinic or even spend two quarters doing a clinic. That experience, being able to translate the substantive law into practice and to do it in a learning environment where students get feedback, is huge. Getting critical feedback so you’re able to improve as you’re doing it is phenomenal, and I think it puts our students in a better position to start practicing at a higher level.

The policy labs are another experiential way to apply what students are learning while gaining client skills. How do you serve the clients? What’s the real-world application of what you’re learning? And we’ve also expanded our negotiation and trial advocacy programs. All of those opportunities to get hands-on experience, I think, have made a real difference in how prepared our students are when they enter the market.

Then there are opportunities outside of the classroom—the work that the John and Terry Levin Center for Public Service and Public Interest Law has done providing externships and pro bono work, really encouraging all of our students from the outset to think about how they’re going to give back and how they’re going to incorporate it into a career. I think that’s made a significant difference.

Can you elaborate on that? How does your office work with the Levin Center to help students navigate that important quandary: how to pursue their interest in making the world a better place and contributing to society while working in the private sector?

I think the fundamental driver within both my office and the Levin Center is to make all career paths possible and to help students understand that their first job is probably not their last job—that many attorneys move in and out of the private sector, the public sector, public interest. So they don’t have to pick a lane right when they get here. Helping them understand that there are different ways to accomplish seemingly contrasting goals—family commitments, financial commitments, and the desire to make a difference. We help them to recognize that they can make a difference just about anywhere.

And we help them get a variety of experiences while they’re here. My thought about law school is that you have three years to experiment and try as many different things as you can. And one of the great things about the law school is that there are so many different ways to do that. See if you like intellectual property or if you like torts. What do you get excited about when you’re here? And then try those things out. Do an externship, work with a professor, have several experiences during your summer. All of that enables you to then make choices at transition points throughout your career.

Stanford has a reputation for being a place of innovation and experimentation, with the entrepreneurial spirit. Do you see that entrepreneurialism, the willingness to try new things?

Absolutely. I think the legal field is a more conservative field in terms of being a little more risk averse. But I do see in our students a high level of that entrepreneurial spirit and a willingness to try things. Every year, we see students who are creating their own paths, who are starting their own businesses, who are moving into non-law careers right after graduation or shortly thereafter. We try to encourage students to think about the possibilities they’ll have when they leave here, not just their first job. What are the skills you want to be building? And you see that in the students’ willingness to take different classes, to branch out beyond the law school and take classes across campus. I think you see that across the board.

Let’s turn now to the course that you have been teaching on leadership and influence skills for lawyers. Can you talk a bit about that class and your experience with it?

Absolutely. I’ve been teaching that class with one of our fabulous alumni, Michelle Galloway, for the last 15 years. We developed it after former Dean Larry Kramer and I met in different cities with alumni who were hiring partners. They talked about what they were looking for in the next generation of lawyers. And what we heard consistently was a lot of praise for the quality of graduates we were turning out—that they’re excellent at legal analysis, persuasive writing, and so on. But the one piece that we heard was missing in all of the more junior attorneys was what we call leadership skills—more broadly, professional development and communication skills—interpersonal communications, team dynamics, team management, and persuasive speaking, besides oral argument. How do you make a pitch? How do you influence people? Early in your career, you’re influencing up. How do you influence without power? How do you persuade people in times of transition and change? Skills that I think take a good lawyer to being a great lawyer. So we created a class that focused on those skill sets. And it’s very different from your traditional legal class. It is primarily focused on specific skill sets and practicing them. We have lots of exercises where students have to practice giving pitches to clients or maybe they have to use the research that’s out there on how to influence, for example, a fake company through some unwanted change. And how do they do that when they’re not the leader of the company? They can’t just tell people what to do. They have to influence them into it. It’s been a lot of fun teaching that class. I think those are key skills that will become even more important.

Yes, I think it’s important for us to continue to provide that sort of training and exposure for our students.

I know you spend a lot of time with alumni, and we learn from them, but also it’s just great to see how they thrive. I wonder if you could talk a bit about that part of your experience.

One of the things that sets Stanford Law School apart is how involved our alumni are and how willing they are to help our students. I think that stems from the small, tight-knit community—that our students feel connected while they’re here. There are a lot of fond memories of Stanford when they leave. They come back to meet with students and talk about their practice areas. One of the events that we started this past year we call Farm2Firm, which brought more than 50 of our young alumni, those fewer than five years out, to talk to our students about their practice areas in a really low-key, networking event. They also come back to do programs and panels for us on a variety of issues within the law. They do mock interviews with our students. We are constantly connecting alumni with students. When students have questions about a particular practice area, employer, or career path, we encourage them to reach out to our alumni, and we’ll give them suggestions of alums to talk to. And our alumni are incredibly responsive. The amount of time they’re willing to make available to our students is one of the things that most impresses me about the law school.

And the Farm2Firm initiative was somewhat prompted by the changes in the recruiting schedule and calendar of law firms. That’s clearly been a challenge that your office has had to face.

Yes. In the last 10 years, the recruiting process for second-year summer positions has moved earlier and earlier in the law school calendar. If we’re going back 30 years, the second-year summer recruiting would happen in October or November of a student’s second year. This past year, recruiting for your second-year summer happened in January of the first year. That is quite a change, and it has created a situation where students are being required to make what are, in essence, post-graduate decisions after the first quarter of their law school experience. I don’t think it’s good for anyone. I don’t think it’s good for the students. It’s certainly not good for the firms in terms of retention and the ability to hire people who know exactly what they want to do. But there were several market forces that pushed things earlier.

Anyway, we had to figure out how to get students ready for early recruiting. Part of that requires getting as much information to them, giving them as much exposure, as efficiently as possible, because they also need to learn the law in that first quarter. Farm2Firm came out of that—we wanted to help students ease into networking and to learn as much as possible about practice areas in this more condensed amount of time.

Well, Susan, over the last three decades, you’ve been such a dedicated, creative, inspirational, caring member of the law school senior management team. And there have been 30 years of students and graduates who owe so much to you. I wondered if you had any words of advice that you would give to your successor, who will be joining the office at a very challenging time, a time of great change in the profession and, frankly, in higher education as well.

I think the key in this transitional period is to be as flexible as possible. The ability to quickly shift gears as the market moves is important, while keeping in mind the main goal—helping students and alumni figure out how they want to use their law degree and how they can have a fulfilling career. The pace at which things are moving is particularly stressful for students, so trying to figure out ways to help them, to reduce as much stress as possible, and having a high level of empathy for what the students are going through are paramount. You have to be flexible and not lose sight of all of the different pressure points, the pain points of the constituents you’re serving. What are the employers struggling with? What are the students struggling with? I see the role of the career services office as smoothing the pathway for all involved, making it easier for the employers and the students to connect and find their way. And so it means constantly keeping an eye on all that. In other words, how can we make things easier for everyone involved?

Well, I know I speak for the entire community—the faculty, the staff, the students, the graduates, our alumni—in saying that we’re greatly indebted to you for the 30 years of exemplary service to the school. Thank you.

Thank you. I have to say that it’s been such an amazing experience. You don’t stay somewhere for 30 years if you aren’t enjoying what you’re doing. It’s a job that has constantly evolved, so it has stayed fresh and interesting for me, but the constant throughout has been the people. The students, who are fabulous, the amazing staff and faculty, who are all focused on the same educational goal and focused on the students. It’s been a real privilege to work at Stanford. SL