“我刚成为合伙人”这句话听起来确实如同天籁之音，也是很多刚刚进入律师事务所和投资银行的雇员们渴望有一天能够说出口的一句话。

    但如今，成为合伙人的意义已经今非昔比。实际上，这一点也已经不是什么新鲜事了。但是，很多刚入行的雇员仍然渴望能够实现这一目标。

    为什么？原因很多，其中大多涉及传统和薪酬。不过，尽管成为合伙人并不是毫无意义，初入职场的人还是应当考量一下，它是否是一个可靠的终极目标。

    大约20年前，成为合伙人的好处显而易见。首先，它意味着薪酬上调，而且，合伙人与准合伙人的职责划分也泾渭分明。当时的合伙人是一家公司或事务所少数几个股东之一。但如今，“要成为一名股权合伙人比以往任何时候都要困难，”《美国律师》（American Lawyer）的总编罗宾•斯巴克曼称。“它需要更长的时间，对律师的要求也更苛刻。”

    《美国律师》搜集的数据显示，2000年，（按照营收排名的）美国200强律师事务所全部合伙人中约78%是股权合伙人，到了2010年，这些事务所的股权合伙人比例下降到了62%。

    成为合伙人就等于拿到黄金入场券的日子已经一去不复返了。事实上，有时情况可能还正好相反。举例来说，本月早些时候，由于公司事先向合伙人承诺的一些特殊待遇未能兑现，杜威路博国际律师事务所（Dewey & LeBoeuf）有约20名合伙人集体离职。同时，在投资银行界，近几个月来高盛（Goldman Sachs）也有相当比例的合伙人离职。或许可以说，十年前当高盛从纯粹的合伙企业转变为一家上市公司起，高盛的文化就已经开始转型了。

    过去几十年来，随着金融公司和律师事务所的扩张、兼并和全球化，少数人持股的模式已经土崩瓦解。接着，经济衰退来袭，这些公司可分发给员工的钱也减少了。如今，随着很多事务所开始重新招聘，每家事务所对内部等级制度的定义也发生了变化。

    “律师事务所不得不面对现实，它们不能让太多人成为股权合伙人，否则将无法生存，”律师事务所咨询公司Edge International的创始合伙人加里•瑞斯金表示。因此，他说，一些事务所将合伙人分成了三六九等，处在顶层的是股权合伙人；其他等级的合伙人“可能会参照其他事务的做法，或者只是一种更体面的薪酬支付方式。”

    “合伙人这个字眼的含义就跟癌症一样宽泛，”美国董事协会（American Board Association）法律管理业务部的肯•扬称。“它在商界有一定意义，但人们需要挖掘这名头下的具体内涵。”

    "I just made partner" sure sounds like music to the ears. It's a line many early-career employees at law firms and investment banks aim to say one day.

    But making partner doesn't mean what it used to. It hasn't for a while, in fact. And still, many entering the workforce covet that milestone.

    Why? There are a couple of reasons, most of them having to do with tradition and pay. And while making partner isn't meaningless, job seekers entering the workforce should question whether it's a solid end-goal.

    About 20 years ago, the benefits of making partner at a firm were clear. It meant a pay increase, first of all, and there was a distinction of responsibilities between partners and associates. A partner was one of few shareholders in the company or firm. But these days, "it's harder than ever to become an equity partner," says Robin Sparkman, the editor in chief of the American Lawyer, "it takes longer, and the demands on that lawyer are more stringent."

    According to data collected by the American Lawyer, about 78% of all partners at the top 200 law firms (ranked by revenue) were equity partners in 2000. By 2010, 62% of partners at these firms had the same status.

    No longer is making partner a golden ticket. In fact, in some cases, it can mean the opposite. Earlier this month, for example, about 20 partners at law firm Dewey & LeBoeuf left en masse after the firm couldn't make good on some of the promised perks of partnership. And, in the world of investment banking, Goldman Sachs (GS) has seen its fair share of partner-level departures in recent months. Arguably, Goldman's culture started to change about a decade ago when it transitioned from a true partnership to a public company.

    The model of having a firm with a small group of owners who held equity stakes began to break down over the past couple of decades as financial and legal firms expanded, merged, and globalized. Then the recession hit, and firms simply had less money to give to people. Now, as many are starting to rehire, each defines its internal hierarchy differently.

    "Law firms just have to face the reality that they can't make too many people equity partners or they can't survive," says Gerry Riskin, founding partner of law firm consulting firm Edge International. As a result, he says, some offer tiered partnerships with equity partners at the top. Other levels of partnership, Riskin says, "may be based on what other firms are doing, or may be just a glorified way of paying a salary."

    "Partner is as broad of a word as cancer is," says Ken Young, who is part of the American Board Association's Law Practice Management Section. "To the business community, it means something, but people need to dig beneath the title."

    希望能进律师事务所工作的年轻人也不例外。面试中最关键的问题不再是“我什么时候能成为合伙人？”，而是“成为合伙人究竟意味着什么？”

    扬说，有时候，成为合伙人可能包括不利合约。一些事务所强迫律师签署协议，如果退出合伙人将受到惩罚。比如，扬知道的某些事务所要求合伙人离开时必须缴回上一年所有的资本收益。

    虽然如此，“合伙人”一词还是颇有分量。只要成为合伙人仍意味着薪酬上调，它的重要性就不会消失。即便合伙合约已经变了，这一身份的重要意义并未改变。扬打了个比方，说它就像Polo衫上的标识。这是传统体系的传承，是可以告诉父母的喜讯，也可以在鸡尾酒派对上让人刮目相看。

    “我们这个社会注重形形色色的名号，”康奈尔大学（Cornell）产业劳工关系学院（Industrial and Labor Relations School）的人力资本发展执行主任迈克尔•赛瑞诺称。对于在学校和职场一路斩获各种成就和荣誉的人们，争取获得一家顶级律师事务所的合伙人名号尤其重要。

    但环境也很重要：成为合伙人不只是影响内心感受，瑞斯金说：“它不仅仅关乎自尊，事实上它也是一种定位——影响到人们对一个人的专业认知。”总的来说，客户倾向于与合伙人共事，他们可不管背后实际的薪酬协议是怎样规定的。

    话虽如此，从业人员也在改变。相比在事务所工作年限更长的雇员，如今的年轻人在工作中追求的东西已经变了。一般而言，事务所的新人对长期忠于一家公司并不那么感兴趣，他们更希望能建立一个能够支撑自身价值体系的职业。这往往意味着更频繁的跳槽，与律师事务所的传统合伙人体制格格不入；传统合伙人体制往往要求员工在一家公司工作多年，其中有些收入要到成为合伙人后才能兑现。

    另一方面，当今很多年轻人进入律师事务所或金融公司时并没有赶上好时候，公司并没有超量的股本和资金分给大家，这也使传统的合伙人模式无以为继。

    赛瑞诺说：“我不认为还有什么是必然的，或许传统模式过去的确具有更多的确定性。”成功当上合伙人的员工必须重新斟酌老一套的观念，随时准备迎接就业市场的转变。换言之，大型律师事务所的新丁们需要重新界定这个传统意义上的里程碑。

    译者：老榆木

    That includes young people looking for jobs at firms. No longer is the key question during an interview, "when will I make partner?" but instead, "what, exactly, does making partner mean?"

    In some cases, becoming partner can include a rather toxic contract, Young says. Some firms force lawyers to sign agreements that penalize them for leaving the partnership. Young knows of firms, for example, that require partners to agree to forfeit all of their capital contributions from the previous year should they decide to leave.

    Yet still, the term "partner" holds sway. And as long as a partnership also means a pay increase, its associated cachet will stick around. Even though the contracts have changed, the status hasn't. It's like the logo on a polo shirt, Young says. It's a holdover from the traditional system, and it's something to tell your parents, or use to impress people at a cocktail party.

    "We are a society that recognizes pedigree steps along the way," says Michael Serino, executive director of Human Capital Development at Cornell's Industrial and Labor Relations School. That's especially true for the kind of person competing to make partner at a top law firm, who has probably been raised on accolades they've received for various educational and professional achievements.

    But context is also important: being a partner doesn't only matter internally, Riskin says: "It's not just ego, it's really positioning -- it affects the way this individual will be perceived professionally." Clients, on the whole, prefer to work with partners, regardless of the compensation agreements behind the curtain.

    That being said, the workforce is changing. Younger people want different things from their jobs than employees who have been at firms longer. Generally, new hires at firms are less interested in loyalty to one company long-term, and more interested in building a career that supports their value system. That tends to mean more job-hopping, which is less conducive to a system that requires paying dues at one firm for years until making partner.

    On the flip side, many young people entering legal or financial firms are taking those jobs at a time when there simply isn't an excess of equity and funding to divvy up between people, which somewhat starves the old partnership model.

    "I don't think there are any givens anymore, and perhaps the old model had more givens," Serino says. "The people that navigate that successfully have to reconsider the assumptions and constantly be ready to anticipate how workplace market conditions are going to change." In other words, young people at big firms will need to redefine the old milestones.