I work at a U.S corporate law firm. Application or sleeping pod advice? AMA

Just wanted to ask, what's a good interview answer for why you choose a US firm?
For me it's the smaller trainee intake but that's so common/generic. Is there anything in specific interviewers are looking for in your answer and anything that can help you stand out?
Thanks P!

Hi, thanks so much for doing this! Your answers were very insightful. I was wondering, when you apply for firms how tailored and specific are your answers to why this firm?

To me a large part of how firms differentiate themselves is international footprint and practice area but it seems hard to tie this back to you as an applicant.

Hi Perseverance,

Thanks for all your advice so far on the thread. I was wondering if you had any tips on attending an assessment centre? From your own experience, what is the best way to stand out and make sure you get the vacation scheme? I have an upcoming one at Herbert Smith Freehills. I haven't been to an assessment centre before so quite nervous about what to expect!

Thanks for your help!

Hi Perseverance,

I just have a few random questions I'm asking out of interest!

What are your actual average working hours and how often do you/have you had to work until early hours in the morning?

Also have you ever used a sleeping pod at work?

Is the culture friendly or is it backstabbing/competitive?


Thanks for your time!

Hi Perseverance,

Have you got any insight into Milbank as a firm, I haven't been able to find too much about their London office online

Comments above

Thanks for reply! Sounds good glad it's friendly!

I was always curious about the sleeping pods haha

Hey - I'm not sure if you saw my post in the vacation scheme thread, but if not:

Group exercise

Depending on the number of interviewees on the day, group exercises will usually range from four to eight people with a host of assessors sitting in for the duration of the exercise. Students might be given a case study to read and are then asked to discuss the activity in a group. The group must then present their findings. Alternatively the students may be split into smaller groups and asked to negotiate. The types of case studies vary - I've seen fictional business dilemmas, firm strategy/sector discussions to the unusual 'who would you invite to a dinner party?'.

Assessors are looking to see how you operate within a group dynamic. However many share misconceptions that those who speak the most and put forth the most forceful arguments are necessarily the most successful. In fact, being either extremity: too loud or too quiet, are common reasons candidates are rejected. When practicing as lawyers, knowing when to speak and when to listen are vital qualities both when working in a team and interacting with clients: acting competitive can suggest poor teamwork and interpersonal skills.

On the other hand, a good candidate can defend or concede their points of view where appropriate. They will interject with useful arguments which progress the team towards the main objective, whilst ensuring they listen to different points of view. In fact, there are many roles a candidate can take to do well within a group. This includes effective time management, approaching and listening to quieter members of the group and delegating responsibilities.

Written exercise

Students are often given 1 hour to read a case study and draft a letter, email or memorandum to a client or lawyer. They are designed to test your ability to articulate the key points in a concise manner. This is a key skill for lawyers who must breakdown technical legal speak in a form that clients can understand.

Take as much time as necessary to read the information; there will be vital information in the text which can be easily overlooked if skimming. From there, the correct form must be taken, for example in a letter, write the address in the top right hand corner, sign appropriately and check whether to use your name or a name that has been given to you in the exercise (i.e. if you're representing a law firm).

Time will often be the biggest challenge throughout the assessment. Students often use this as an excuse to write as much information as possible and turn what could have been a good answer into a very mediocre one. Taking the time to plan your answer and noting the most relevant points demonstrates you are confident enough to be strategic. It is very common to have too much information in these case studies and the assessors are looking to see who can distinguish between what is useful and what is not. Making use of sub headings, numbered points and clear paragraphs makes this easier. The key is to be concise.

Case study interview

These are often seen by students as one of the more difficult assessments. Candidates are given a set time to read a case study, often a very large document and must prepare to answer questions on what they have read.

This task is easier if you know what you are looking for and can focus on reading the relevant subsections as there is often insufficient time to read the whole document. This can be helped by marking the useful sections for later review. Importantly interviewers do not expect you to have memorised all the information and it's wise to review the case study during the interview. You are tested on your ability to reason and draw conclusions, particularly when the nature of the topic is technical and you often are not expected to know the right answers. You can say you don't know if you don't know.

It is important to consider both the legal AND business implications of the scenario. The latter is often overlooked by students, but it is essential. Clients are looking for how the legal consequences impact their business.

Competency interviews

Learn how to sell your experience. You don’t need to be captain of the rowing team or a volunteer at the Citizens Advice Bureau to stand out. This is often a new skill for students to learn because they’re too used to being modest about their achievements. Interviewers don’t have the benefit of knowing how impressive your achievement is unless you tell them.

It’s easy to transform the seemingly mundane experience into a tale of achievement by following the S-T-A-R or the C-A-R method. This structure forces you to be concise and bring out the best of your experience.

For example:

Context

This should be brief. Include enough information to provide the necessary background to explain what you were doing. This is the least important part.

Action

By contrast this is the most important part and should form the majority of your answer. This is all about you – even if you worked within a team. What was your role? What exactly did you do?

Result

Briefly outline the outcome. The best answers quantify the outcome ‘I secured £3,000 in funding’ or ‘the magazine was distributed to 300 students’.

Be able to answer the following (and more):

Filling out a table like this might be helpful:



Always be specific, focus on what you did (even if you did something as part of a team) and try to use different experiences for different competencies if you can.


With regard to HSF, this is from another post I did (a little overlaps with the above):

Mine was a few years ago, I don't know whether they've changed it since so apologies if this isn't too helpful!

Case study

The case study can be quite challenging: be prepared to walk a partner through an acquisition (the target will often be a big brand) and in particular, what factors you will need to think about. I find it helps when students split it into categories something like this:

Then be prepared to think about how you can get protections if things go wrong i.e. warranties and indemnities, reduction of the purchase price etc.

Group exercise

You can't prepare for the fact patterns and that's understandably frustrating. But you can prepare how you behave which is exactly what they're assessing (interpersonal skills/communication etc.). Think about:

Really try think of the group exercise as a team working towards an objective. If someone in the team is going down the wrong path or being forceful, try to guide them but if you can't get them back it'll be to their own detriment. Also note that you can take a number of roles from time-keeper to scribe: you don't necessarily have to lead.

Let me know if you want me to expand on anything in more detail.

I was too! They're actually quite nice, with a reasonably large room and an en-suite. It's just a very curious concept!

Thanks for that, that’s really helpful! In terms of the case study, how much detail did you find was required? And did the partners ask many questions during it? Thanks for your help 😊

Oh I didn't realise they had a full en-suite and everything! I always pictured the Japanese type sleeping pods!

Funnily enough so did I. I suppose if you're staying the night they want to treat you right! Free deliveroo late evening also makes it slightly easier

A lot of detail, I didn't actually do too well in that AC. I was under-prepared and he really interrogated me on each part. I think you're signed up to the commercial awareness newsletter I do. I'm happy to make that the next topic if it would help!

- P

Not sure if it's been asked before, but how seriously do US firms look at grades? Will they scrutinise ever single module. There are a couple I want to apply for this late in the day. I feel I have good reasons for why that firm and why law there. I have the base requirements but then when you dig deeper into module they may not stack up. Looking on LinkedIn profiles of some trainees, they appear 1st and A*. Any thoughts much appreciated??