The Difference Between a Rainmaker and a Leader
One of the biggest mistakes I see law firms make is assuming their best rainmaker should also become their next leader.
At first glance, it makes perfect sense.
The attorney has built an incredible book of business.
Clients trust them.
They've helped grow the firm.
Surely they're the obvious choice to lead.
Sometimes they are.
Many times, they aren't.
Because bringing work into a law firm and leading one are two entirely different skill sets.
Rainmakers Create Opportunity
Every successful law firm needs people who love business development.
Rainmakers create momentum.
They build relationships.
They earn trust.
They become known in the community.
Without them, many firms simply wouldn't grow.
Rainmaking is an extraordinary skill.
It just isn't the same skill as leadership.
Leadership Requires a Different Set of Strengths
Leadership isn't measured by the size of someone's book of business.
It's measured by their ability to make the organization better.
That means:
developing people
making difficult decisions
holding others accountable
creating alignment
improving systems
building culture
thinking beyond their own practice
Those responsibilities require a very different mindset than developing clients.
The best leaders aren't just successful attorneys.
They're multipliers.
They make everyone around them better.
Not Every Great Attorney Wants to Lead
One thing I've learned over the years is that many outstanding attorneys don't actually want leadership responsibilities.
They love practicing law.
They enjoy serving clients.
They thrive on originating work.
Managing people?
Not so much.
And that's perfectly okay.
Leadership shouldn't be viewed as the mandatory next step in a successful legal career.
It should be a role reserved for people who genuinely want—and are equipped—to lead.
Align Roles With Strengths
One of the most rewarding engagements I've had involved helping a firm rethink the role of one of its strongest attorneys.
This attorney was an exceptional rainmaker.
Bringing in business came naturally.
Clients loved them.
But servicing the legal work wasn't where they created the greatest value.
Rather than continuing to compensate them heavily for servicing matters, we redesigned the compensation structure to align with their strengths.
The attorney focused more on originating new business.
Experienced senior attorneys handled more of the legal work.
The result was better client service, stronger attorney development, and a significant improvement in profitability because more of the work was completed by salaried attorneys rather than through variable service compensation.
Nothing about the attorney changed.
We simply aligned the role with the strengths they already had.
Great Firms Need More Than One Type of Attorney
One misconception I frequently encounter is the idea that every successful attorney should look the same.
In reality, the healthiest firms intentionally build teams with different strengths.
Some attorneys are outstanding originators.
Some are exceptional servicing attorneys.
Some become remarkable leaders.
Others successfully blend two—or even all three—of those roles.
The key is recognizing those differences early and designing compensation, expectations, and career paths around them.
Trying to force every attorney into the same mold limits both the individual and the firm.
Leadership Is About Building the Firm
Rainmakers often ask:
"How do I grow my practice?"
Leaders ask:
"How do we grow the firm?"
That subtle difference changes everything.
Leaders spend time thinking about:
succession planning
developing future partners
improving operations
strengthening culture
increasing profitability
building systems that outlast any one individual
Those responsibilities extend far beyond individual production.
Compensation Should Reinforce the Right Behaviors
One of the biggest opportunities I see in law firms is ensuring compensation aligns with each attorney's primary role.
When firms clearly identify whether someone is primarily a:
rainmaker
servicing attorney
leader
or hybrid
they can design compensation that encourages the behaviors the firm actually wants.
Too often, firms unintentionally reward attorneys for doing work outside their greatest strengths.
The result is lower profitability, less collaboration, and frustrated attorneys.
The right compensation structure allows everyone to focus on where they create the most value.
Leadership and technical excellence are complementary—but they are not interchangeable.
Leadership Should Be Earned Differently
One of the healthiest cultural shifts a firm can make is separating leadership potential from production numbers.
Origination matters.
Billable hours matter.
Client service matters.
But leadership requires something more.
It requires emotional intelligence.
Judgment.
Humility.
The ability to develop others.
And the willingness to make decisions that benefit the organization as a whole—even when they don't personally benefit you.
The Real Question
Instead of asking:
"Who's our biggest rainmaker?"
Ask:
"Who's already demonstrating the behaviors of a leader?"
Those answers may overlap.
But they don't have to.
And your firm will be stronger when you recognize the difference.
Building a successful law firm isn't about finding attorneys who excel at everything. It's about helping each attorney contribute where they create the greatest value.
I help law firms design leadership structures, compensation models, and organizational strategies that align roles with strengths—creating healthier teams, stronger cultures, and more profitable firms.