Like the sentimental editorial in a trashy mag (not this mag!), they lend a legitimate façade to something far more salacious — the careers section. And among those shiny opportunities, in-house openings are always the favourite child.

It’s true, going in-house can make for happy endings but associates often make the first move with little idea of what to expect. You will figure it out, of course. You always do. But not knowing what to expect can actually hurt you on the way in too. More and more, employers are differentiating in-house hopefuls on their understanding of the realities of corporate law department life. When you have never been in-house, this creates an obvious conundrum. So, in an effort to make the interview more successful, the transition smoother, or even the initial decision clearer, here are five things you should know about moving in-house.

Beyond memos and the word ‘no’

As one corporate counsel put it, being in-house is about being faced with a variety of business objectives that can run into legal stumbling blocks. Your job as counsel is to find the path of least resistance to achieving those goals which is really a lesson in risk management. So if your client wants to get from A to B, but the preferred course will likely mean criminal charges, your job is to find the alternate course that is only confined by some soft regulatory language.

Gone are the days of being able to give up at “no.” What sucks about this is that just when you have mastered the oxymoronic art of being really concise yet thorough in written opinions that are worthy of a literary prize, you realize that you will probably never write a memo again. What’s great about this is that instead of being the heavy, you get to be . . . the fixer? Very Tarantino, very cool. This perception is especially important because it will set the culture for how legal is viewed by management including how much management involves you in business decisions.

In terms of delivering legal advice, the expectation is that you will deliver real-time, pragmatic advice that gives actual recommendations in a way that resonates with business people who don’t really care to know what the steps to the Oakes test are.

So, some things you can cut out of your repertoire are — case citations, legalese, loads of options with no recommendations, and the word “no.”

Finally, as you get into more senior in-house roles, the analysis may become even further removed from your legal upbringing. You may be expected to figure in a whole whack of things like the profitability of the company and corporate reputation. So don’t be surprised if those imposter blues hit you all over again.

No-frills law

Let’s face it, firms are built to impress. I too was taken in by the corridors filled with art that confused and therefore impressed me, the internal winding staircases (weird, I know — but I always thought these were especially cool) and the on-site printing team that was like a word-processing tuck shop. But if you really want to be in-house, you may not want to develop a dependency on warm cookies. Snacks aside, the greater withdrawal often experienced is a lack of resources. This is certainly not always the case but some associates find that one of the biggest transitions is learning to cope without luxuries like scores of lawyers to bounce your ideas off of, heaps of precedents, and an assistant that remembers your birthday.

It’s not all scary. While you are expected to figure out more things on your own and make more judgment calls, there is new support in the way of external counsel. One in-house lawyer explained that external counsel is an opportunity to confirm conclusions that she arrived at on her own. Another in-house lawyer said for matters that are farther outside his expertise, external counsel is often a starting point that prevents him from spinning his wheels.

Aside from external counsel, online resources may become another saving grace. One in-house lawyer pointed out that, in addition to traditional online resources, online precedents stemming from CLEs she attends are something she frequently consults.

On the administrative side — I can’t really help you out. You will either have good support or a good chance that the receptionist will tell you to bugger off when you ask her to type a letter for you. You can avoid this predicament to some extent by asking what kind of support a position offers at the interview stage. Two points, however: I would wait until you know you’re a favourite (at least a second interview) and certainly avoid harping on the subject as it can be hard to put out there without sounding obnoxious.

In the end, it is not so bad and while the company is not going to shell out for a library and warm cookies, you realize they are shelling out for the best resource — you.