I had a friend with a very strong New England accent. She got sick of people stopping her when she was speaking and saying it was cute, etc. She got rid of the accent. She explained "I would rather people listen to what I am saying than how I am saying it." She understood the accent was distracting from the message. Take it or leave it, but I think it is an interesting lesson.
I think you asked about shoes and whether loafers are OK. As long as shoes are clean and professional, I think they are fine, though most interviewees (I think) wear lace ups. I said I think because I do not believe I have noticed any one's shoes this interview season. That said, no need to distract. Go with something traditional - and get a shoe shine.
22 comments:
HP - Can you talk about the effectiveness of thank-you notes after call-backs? Are they necessary?
HP -- Would be interested in your thoughts on transfer students in the job market. I attend a mid 50s ranked school. I'm on law review, moot court, etc. Is it better to stick it out here with solid credentials or to leverage my performance into transfer admission at a top 20 school? I'm trying to gauge if I'd gain more from having a better school on my resume than I'd lose from not having the credentials/experience at my current school. Thanks.
Any thoughts or comments on the hiring of Federal Clerks, both at the District and Appellate levels....
What about colored shirts for girls, like light blue or light lavender with a black suit?
9:09 - transfer. I did and I don't regret it at all!
Is it a turn-off to firms to be asking questions like how they evaluate who becomes partner, how many of their partners are home-grown? They are genuine questions, but I am not sure if it is premature at this stage, or may appear too serious.
Hi HP - Could you shed some light on what kinds of strategic planning or financial performance questions would be appropriate for an interviewee to ask?
For example, is it okay to ask about how the interviewer sees the next 3-5 years unfolding for a particular section (do you plan to grow, add laterals, promote people to partner, etc)?
I know a competent Googler can usually find at least cursory data on overall financial performance, but is it okay to ask about financial stability? I think a lot of students are really nervous given the headlines (and the Dow getting killed) over the last few days.
What are the benefits of working at a firm's branch that has 150-180over that of working at another firm's branch 300? I realize it varies firm to firm, but do you take the name over responsibility? The small firm will ensure more responsibility I think.
Which provides for a better exit strategy down the road?
Hi HP - for those of us who are still looking for an(other) offer, when is the best time to send out mailings. I am assuming that it would be best to do so after the firm has recieved most of its acceptances / rejections from summer associates... but when is that likely to take place?
addendum to above: as a 3L
I would also like to know the etiquite for thank-you notes and their effectiveness/necessity. Should we send one to the interviewers after an on-campus interview? Or only after a call-back interview? Both? Do they have an effect? Does anyone say, "Oh, s/he didn't send a thank you note. We're not hiring them now." Or after an on-campus interview, do they ever think, "Wow, this person was just so-so but this is a really nice thank you note, maybe we should invite them for a call back interview."
Could you give us some insight into what is going on behind the scenes when a firm is taking two or three weeks to make a decision after a callback? Are they waiting to hear back from offers they already sent out, or does it really take that long for some firms to make a decision?
Could you discuss why a firm would wait one to two weeks to even offer a callback? Do some firms do all of their ding letters at one or is there a hierarchy if some callbacks say no.
Thanks!
I'm not a hiring partner myself, but having gone through the process, I can tell you that firms wait a while to get back to people because (1) At some firms, recruiting committees meet once a week or even once every two weeks; and (2) Some firms do want to see what their yield is based on offer acceptances and callbacks, before "dinging" all other candidates. The old adage is generally true - you should continue to consider yourself in the running until you get that dreaded rejection letter.
On the subject of thank you notes -- my school (a top 10 school) counseled us that there is no need to send a thank you note after 1st round screening interviews / OCI, unless you built some special connection with the interviewer and are very interested in the firm.
The advice varies a bit after callbacks. I have always sent thank you notes after callback. However, our career office emphasizes that, just like any other piece of communication, you must be VERY careful not to make mistakes on your note. Our career office says a thank you note with errors can end up doing more harm than good.
Full disclosure - I'm a 3L with a job offer post-graduation, so the above seemed to work for me.
Sept 20, 2:39pm asked whether it's better to take name over responsibility and which one provides a better exit strategy.
I say choose the firm that can give you good, meaningful work, and where you can build relationships.
Let's face it - how many "doc review" associates does BigLaw spit back out into the market every year? A big name might get you a glance, but you still won't get the job if you have nothing to offer. When a market is flooded with candidates (and law is certainly one of them), it's all about differentiation.
Perhaps frame the question this way: Who is a better lateral hire? A BigLaw associate who has done nothing but doc review? Or a Small / Medium Law associate who has gone through various stages of a trial or a transaction, with a recommendation from a long-time practitioner?
I have heard from partners at big firms and career lawyers at the DOJ that your professional reputation will get you farther than any firm name on your resume. So seek out places where you can build a reputation, rather than spend time being a nameless worker bee.
I should clarify that I'm not saying all big law firms give out meaningless work. You just have to be selective about which one you work for. There are big law firms that nurture their associates very well, and then there are ones that are more rigid, and require you to do the drudge work for a year or two (or even more) before they will let you do more substantive things.
Again, pick the firm where you think you will get meaningful work, and can build meaningful relationships.
Any suggestions on how to determine which firms give substantive work, and which do not? Not exactly an easy thing to figure out. I assume partner/associate ratio probably plays a role.
Other than talking with people who work (or worked) there, is there any other way of evaluating? Are vault ratings on satisfaction really that reliable?
Sept 25 7:55am - You are correct that it's difficult to know for sure, unless you can find a former employee to confirm. I've tried the following, with varying degrees of success:
1) Ask them how they staff the cases that come in;
2) Ask each of the associates you meet how they spend their time in the office -- if the patterns are consistent, the likelihood that it's true is a bit higher. (Of course, they can all just be spitting out the company line).
3) Ask the associates, "How have the partners helped you in developing your expertise and practice?"
4) Yes, the mid-level associate satisfaction survey is somewhat helpful, but as with all surveys of this sort, you can't get too specific with the data. I mean, how would you differentiate between a firm that ranks 13 versus 15? The anecdotes on Vault profiles are just that - anecdotes, single data points.
Finally, don't forget your school's alumni - they can be a wealth of information, or can at least provide you with referrals to the people you need to talk to.
Hope this helps somewhat.
Yes, it was helpful. Thanks for the insight.
did hp lose his job in this financial mess? where is he?
Just a hunch, but I assume this is the period during which the difficult juggling act really begins for HP. (1) This is the period when people are accepting or turning down offers, which means recruiting departments have to analyze their yield to see if they need to invite more people for callbacks or give out more offers; (2) They are probably busy crunching math to see how many people they can / need to hire (not just law school, but laterals), especially since the financial picture has changed so dramatically, and continues to swing on a daily basis. (3) I assume HP, based on his title, also has to work full-time as an attorney. Could be anything - one of his clients could be one of the banks out there!
I'm not his spokesperson, but the broader point is that if recruiting folks and hiring attorneys are taking longer to get back to people during this time, don't be too surprised. Hang tight as long as you have not received a formal rejection, and just follow up at appropriate intervals. However, if something is really driving your decision timeline (say, you have other offers and you must get back to people in a week or whatever), then you should get in touch with recruiters and politely let them know you are operating under a deadline. They completely understand that sort of thing.
Post a Comment