From the outside, working in-house often looks like the “calmer” legal path. More balance. Fewer billable hours. Less pressure.
And while some of that can be true, the reality of in-house life is far more nuanced than most people expect.
When I moved in-house, there were a number of things that genuinely surprised me — not necessarily in a bad way, but in a way that required a big mental shift. If you’re considering an in-house role (or are newly in one), these are some realities it helps to be prepared for.
There Is No Standard — And That Takes Adjusting
One of the biggest surprises was realising just how little standardisation exists across in-house teams.
Every company does things differently.
Every legal team has its own approach.
Every manager has their own priorities, risk appetite, and working style.
What is considered completely wrong in one company can be entirely standard in another. Templates, processes, approval flows, tone, risk tolerance: all of it varies.
This means that when you move roles, you cannot assume anything.
You have to be mentally flexible, unlearn old habits, and resist the urge to think:
“Well, at my last company we did it like this…”
In-house success depends heavily on your ability to adapt, not on clinging to a single idea of the “right” way to do things.
In-House Doesn’t Always Mean 9–5
Another common assumption is that in-house roles automatically come with strong boundaries.
In reality, it depends entirely on:
-
the company
-
the industry
-
the maturity of the legal function
-
the expectations of leadership
Some in-house roles genuinely respect evenings and weekends. Others don’t — particularly in high-growth companies, deal-heavy environments, or under-resourced legal teams.
Urgent contracts, escalations, executive pressure, or commercial deadlines don’t always respect working hours. That isn’t unique to in-house, but it can surprise people who expected a clean break from late nights.
The key is to go in with realistic expectations and to assess boundaries role by role — not assume they come automatically with the in-house label.
You Become the Go-To for “Random” Questions
Very quickly, people learn that Legal is the place to go when they’re unsure about… well, almost anything.
You’ll get questions that range from important legal issues to things that have nothing to do with legal.
You might be stopped in the corridor, pinged on Slack, or added to meetings with minimal context. Being in-house means being accessible — and learning how to triage, redirect, and politely say “this needs more information” is an essential skill.
You’ll Be Asked to Do Things That Make No Sense
At some point, you will be asked to:
-
join a call with no agenda
-
review a document using the wrong template
-
accept wording you know is suboptimal “to keep the customer happy”
-
work around decisions that were already made without Legal
This can be frustrating, especially early on.
In-house work isn’t just about perfect legal answers — it’s about operating in a business environment where compromise, politics, speed, and optics often matter as much as technical correctness.
Learning when to push back, when to adapt, and when to let something go is part of the job.
You May Be Asked to Advise Outside Your Jurisdiction
This one often catches lawyers by surprise.
In-house, questions don’t neatly stay within one jurisdiction. You might be asked about issues affecting countries you’re not qualified in, simply because Legal is expected to “have a view”.
Of course, this doesn’t mean giving unqualified advice — but it does mean:
-
spotting issues
-
flagging risk
-
knowing when to escalate
-
knowing when external counsel is needed
Being clear about the limits of your qualification, while still being helpful, is a delicate but important balance.
“There Is No Budget” Is a Sentence You’ll Hear a Lot
In-house legal work is constantly shaped by cost considerations.
External advice, tools, training, and solutions often come with budget pushback. You’ll be asked to:
-
think creatively
-
prioritise ruthlessly
-
decide what really needs escalation
This can feel uncomfortable at first, but it forces you to sharpen your judgement and focus on what genuinely adds value.
Egos Can Matter More Than Being Right
Finally — and perhaps most frustratingly — you may discover that being right doesn’t always mean your view will be adopted.
Templates may stay wrong because the person who created them doesn’t want to admit an error.
Processes may remain inefficient because change feels political.
Decisions may be driven by seniority rather than logic.
This isn’t unique to legal — it’s organisational reality.
Part of working in-house is learning how to influence without alienating, raise issues without bruising egos, and pick the battles that truly matter.
Final Thoughts
Working in-house is rewarding, challenging, and often very different from what people imagine.
It requires:
-
flexibility
-
emotional intelligence
-
strong communication
-
commercial awareness
-
and a thick skin at times
None of this makes in-house roles worse — just more human, more complex, and more dependent on context.
If you’re feeling surprised by any of the above, you’re not doing it wrong.
You’re just discovering what in-house work really looks like.