If you’ve spent a few years in-house and you’re now trying to move back into private practice, you may have heard a version of this: “Great CV… but you’re a bit too in-house for what we need.”
It can be frustrating (and sometimes unfair), especially if you trained in private practice, your technical ability hasn’t gone anywhere and you’re perfectly capable of billing, managing clients and working at pace.
But it’s also worth understanding what that feedback usually means, because once you do, it becomes much easier to position yourself and get traction.
Our legal team has had many calls with candidates trying to navigate this exact move, and the same themes come up again and again. Most firms aren’t questioning whether you’re a strong lawyer — they’re trying to reduce perceived risk. The good news is: once you address those risk points directly on your CV and in interview, you’ll usually see a noticeable shift in how you’re received.
What “too in-house” really means to law firms
Most firms aren’t questioning whether you’re a good lawyer. They’re trying to reduce perceived risk. When someone says “too in-house”, they’re often worried about one (or more) of the following:
Billing rhythm: can you (and will you) hit targets consistently?
Pace and volume: can you handle multiple matters with constant client demand?
Client management: can you build and keep a book (even a small one) or support fee generation?
Technical freshness: are you still close to the cutting edge of the practice area?
Mindset: will you be comfortable with the commercial realities of private practice?
None of that is insurmountable. But you do need to address it head-on, ideally before it becomes a reason to screen you out.
Why you’re returning to private practice (and how to explain it)
One of the quickest ways to lose a firm is sounding like you’re “escaping” in-house rather than deliberately choosing practice.
A strong answer is specific, positive, and credible. For example:
“I want more technical depth and greater variety of matters.”
“I miss the advisory intensity and working on complex deals end-to-end.”
“I want a clearer path to progression in my specialism.”
“I want to be closer to client work again, rather than internal stakeholder cycles.”
A weaker answer (even if it’s true) is: “I’m bored” / “I want to leave my company” / “In-house isn’t for me.”
Tip: If you’re returning because the in-house role shifted away from the work you enjoy (common), say that clearly but keep it professional.
How to make your CV read like private practice again
Most CVs undersell in-house work for private practice audiences. Your CV needs to do two things:
Translate in-house experience into what private practice law firms value
Prove you’ve retained (or regained) the skillset they’re worried you’ve lost
CV tweaks that make a big difference
Lead with practice-style work, not internal process
Instead of "Supported stakeholders across the business…” Use: “Advised on [X] transactions/issues, including [deal type/contract type/value/risk level].”
Quantify where you can
“Led negotiations on 25+ commercial agreements per quarter”
“Supported a portfolio spanning [regions/industries]”
“Handled [high-risk] matters with board-level exposure”
Show “external pace”
If you worked with external counsel, vendors, regulators, brokers or major clients - bring that forward.
Add a “selected matters” section (even short)
Firms love examples. You don’t need confidential detail, just shape:
What was the issue/deal?
What was your role?
What was the complexity/risk?
What changed because of your advice?
Visit our Career Advice Hub for useful CV and interview tips.
How to address billing and pace concerns in interviews
If billing is the elephant in the room, talk about it before they do.
You don’t need to pretend you’ve been billing in-house. You do need to show you understand what it takes and that you’re choosing it with your eyes open.
A simple interview line that works
“I’m very aware the biggest difference is billing and pace. In-house I’ve run high-volume, high-stakes workstreams with tight deadlines and competing stakeholders. I’m deliberately moving back because I want that external pace again and I’m comfortable being measured on output.”
If you’ve done anything that resembles fee-earning (secondments, chargebacks, managed legal budgets, matter management, panel reviews), mention it. It signals commercial understanding.
Visit our Career Advice Hub for useful CV and interview tips.
Which law firms and practice areas are most open to in-house returners
Not every law firm, or every legal teams, views in-house backgrounds the same way.
You’ll generally find the easiest routes back are:
Teams closely aligned to in-house environments (commercial, employment, regulatory, data/privacy, litigation support depending on sector)
Firms with strong client secondment cultures
Teams with big institutional clients (where in-house insight is genuinely valued)
Firms that sell “commercial advice” not just pure technical output
The hardest moves tend to be where the firm expects:
immediate portable work
a very specific billing history
a narrow technical path with little room for transition time
This isn’t about lowering ambition; it’s about choosing the door that opens first, then moving again once you’ve rebuilt the “practice track record”.
If you keep hearing “too in-house”: "bridge strategies" that work
If you’re repeatedly getting final-stage “too in-house” feedback, consider a bridge that makes you look less risky:
A move to a more practice-adjacent in-house role (higher volume, external stakeholder heavy)
A fixed-term contract that keeps your technical work sharp (and shows you can move fast)
A firm that’s open to a ramp-up period with structured targets
A niche/practice area alignment shift (where your industry experience is a differentiator)
Sometimes the best move back is not the most obvious one — it’s the one that restores the story.
Your “why now?” answer (and how to show it’s a long-term move)
Firms will ask (even if politely): why are you returning now and will you leave again?
A strong answer includes:
What you enjoyed in-house (so you don’t sound reactive)
What you’re specifically seeking in practice (so you sound deliberate)
Why you’re confident it’s a long-term fit (so you sound stable)
Example “why now” answer
“I’ve really valued the commercial exposure in-house, but I’ve realised I’m at my best when I’m doing deep advisory work across a range of matters. I want to build my technical profile and progress in my specialism. I’m choosing private practice again because I want to be measured on that external output and I’ve thought carefully about the billing model and pace.”
The reality: it’s not impossible, but it is a positioning exercise
Returning from in-house to private practice isn’t a “step back”. Done well, it can be a very smart move.
But it rarely works when the CV reads like internal stakeholder management and the interview story sounds like escape.
It works when you:
present your work in practice language
show evidence of pace, volume, technical depth
demonstrate you understand billing and commercial drivers
target the teams where your in-house insight is a genuine asset
If you’re trying to make this move, Gerrard White Legal can help
If you want to talk through where your background fits best (and how to position it), let's talk.
cam@gerrardwhite.com | 07850 469000
