resumes question

Someone asked about how much information to put in the "personal" section of the resume.  This person inquired whether they should list that they came to the United States via the asylum process.  

A commenter pointed out that it might be awkward for the interviewers to ask about the asylum notation.  I agree.  There are many restrictions regarding what we can and cannot ask about in an interview - including age, marital status, national origin, etc.  I would be concerned as an interviewer about asking the candidate regarding his or her asylum notation out of concern it might run afoul of employment laws and regulations. To me, this seems like something you could address in an interview.  Like where an interviewer asked about difficult challenges you have faced, or unique circumstances, or why you went to law school.  I think in that context, your asylum situation would be an interesting and unique take on those questions.

As for other things in the "personal" section, I don't usually spend too much time looking at it; honestly, I would really only remember if it had something unusual (or odd) - which wouldn't necessarily be a good thing.  Most of them say similar things - cooking, travel, road races, etc.  I am more impressed when people show me deep experience and an ability to juggle - since that is what we do every day in law firms - we typically don't get to work on one memo all day or for multiple days until we feel satisfied; rather we have to put out multiple fires and oftentimes when we think we will spend the afternoon doing one thing, a separate unexpected issue comes up and totally derails our plans.

So, if you've supported yourself by working through college/law school - that is something I think should be noted.  If you served in the military - say in Iraq and commanded a unit -- yes, that is relevant and important experience -- clearly you could operate under stress!  (And yes, I have seen reference letters from commanding officers that did help a candidate get a job). 

If you've had unusual and challenging internships, note those as well.  I would just stay away from too much personal stuff.  Are you moving to a "new" city to be with your fiance?  Not for the resume, but more for the interview or perhaps cover letter to explain your connection.

I prefer one page resumes, but if you've had a LOT of work experience -- i.e., you took time between college and law school of more than a couple years -- and you feel you need to go to the next page - then go ahead.  But bear in mind some reviewers may not turn the page. 

Blog's One Year Anniversary - Partial Reveal!

Hello everyone.  I am sorry I haven't blogged lately.  As you know, HP is of course a practicing attorney and HP got really busy with work and multiple deadlines, plus various social commitments.  I will try to blog more often in the coming weeks.

No, I wasn't out celebrating the big one year anniversary of the blog. Can you believe it has been one year since I launched with my list of the top things that annoy the hiring partner?  I really had no big plans to become a blogger, per se, I just kept seeing certain behaviors in our younger lawyers that I knew were really hurting them.  Has this changed?  Well, to a certain extent, due to the economy and the massive change in the way law firms hire and retain lawyers, I do think there's less a sense of entitlement than we had been seeing.  There's still plenty of room for guidance and improvement.  

I will answer some of your questions in upcoming posts but I really felt for the big one year anniversary, something momentous was required.  Something exciting.  Well, no, F-3 and I are not running off to the sunshine of the blogsphere to live happily ever after.  Though I certainly appreciate all F-3 has done in his/her contributions to the blog.  And I appreciate the contributions of the rest of you (except of course when you are slamming HP with really nasty comments).

Which brings me to the big one year celebration announcement.  Are you ready?  Really ready?

(heck I am not sure I am ready)......

HP is a Woman!  

Yes, a female.  So many of you just assumed HP was a man. (Some of you still doubt I am even a lawyer, but I can assure you I am in possession of a valid law degree and bar membership).  I am not certain why so many assumed I am a man.  Because I am a partner?  A Hiring Partner? Heck, plenty of Hiring Partners are women. Was it because I often tell it how it is, kind of straight up, whether it seems harsh or not?  I am not sure, but for those who sometimes accused me of not having a women's point of view, or being anti-woman (which I and those who have worked with me found comical), it may simply have been because I was trying to be gender neutral.

OK, so what does this mean?  Well I hoped you've learned that assumptions can often be wrong. And, hopefully this doesn't change anything. I still aspire to give you useful advice - don't worry guys I am there for you.  For our women readers, I'm hoping this opens up more of a discourse on women's issues in the workplace.  Believe me, I have been there. No one has handed me anything and I know it is not easy.  We can't do it all, 100 percent. Some of us can do a bunch of things pretty (or really) well. But superwoman does not exist. You have to recognize you can't have it all, all the time.  That's been my conclusion.  Sometimes I'm a great parent; sometimes I'm a great lawyer; sometimes I am both; but other times if I'm being a great lawyer and working all night to get something done and missing activities - no, I'm not being a terrific parent.  I guess we will discuss some of this down the road.

Well, I hope that was exciting and I look forward to some thought provoking comments and questions.  

Best,

HP 

ranking; other points of view

Hey folks, on the ranking, I would go with "no layoffs" but the problem is you wouldn't necessarily know about the stealth ones.  I would look at where my best chances are -   do they usually hire multiple candidates from my school, would my grades and other credentials normally make the cut, etc.   What area do I want to do, and do they have a substantial practice in that area (assuming I know).   As I said, shoot wide because it is going to be extremely difficult to get a summer 2L gig AND after that, even if you've done a solid job, no offer  may follow.  

I've been meaning to reach out to our practicing lawyer and recruiter readers.  I am guessing you have some great ideas to contribute here.  Folks, what have you seen this summer or during last year's interviews that candidates should know they should do differently?  What really "saved" a candidate.  HP has a lot of experience, but mine is only one person's and I would welcome your thoughts....and I bet our readers would as well.

Separate note:  I sent an email to someone recently.  I think the guy is out on vacation.  Odd out of office message specifically indicating he is not checking messages and you may wish to call when he gets back because your message might get lost in all his emails that have come in while he was out. I thought this was an odd message. I mean I got the point, but if I were a client, I might think he was saying my matter wasn't particularly important and he's just so busy with other stuff he might forget about my matter.  I just think there's ways to convey these types of messages in ways that make clients and others confident that their matters are or can be covered and that they are important.  Even though clients know we have other clients, they also like to know that they are a top priority.  A better way would be to say "I will be in an area with limited Internet access, but in my absence you can contact my colleagues xyz and abc, who have been briefed on outstanding matters and should be in a position to assist you [and will know how to reach me].  I've often found that most things do wait till after vacation or other absences, but putting a confident message out really helps.  

Hope the week goes well. 

"ranking"

Someone asked about how to rank firms for fall OCI -- in summary, whether firms that have laid off might be better prospects since they have shed "extra weight," or whether lay offs are a sign of a firm's instability and in essence, mean the firm really has no need for further people.   In a normal law firm world, I would say to regard firms that have done lay offs very cautiously.  But, nothing about the current state of the legal market is normal.  

Hence, my answer to "how do you rank is?"..... are you crazy?  I would rank the firms by "where the hell might I get a job?"  This is not a law student/associate market.  Did you miss that?  I'm sorry, but those days are over.  Hopefully, the firms going on campus in fact have slots to fill and hopefully they are being very careful with their numbers.  I know hiring partners and recruiting staff who have already called law schools (yes, even top 25 law schools) and indicated they are not coming on campus this fall.  So, if you've got firms coming on campus, I presume they have some slots to fill. And, at the end of the day, if you wind up with multiple offers, then great for you.  At that point (when you have offers), I would start the "ranking" process -- where do I feel comfortable, what is the firm's reputation in the area (for possible movement later, for instance), what do legal and other news say about the firm?  This is when we would consider lay offs.  For me, if it is a choice between a lay-off firm and one that hasn't done layoffs, I think I would lean toward the non-layoff firms, but you need to do some homework - how are the departments staffed, do they seem overstaffed?  How did the associates seem, did morale seem good?  Perhaps you can talk to someone who spent the summer there this past summer.  Do your homework.  But that is when you have an offer.  

At this point, before you have an offer, go fishing.  Throw that net out far and wide.  The days of the law firm world as your oyster are over.  Ranking will be for after the offer.  Take the interviews you get and go in with a positive attitude to all - even if maybe it's not your first choice -- it may be your only choice.  Sorry to be harsh, but that is the way of the law firm market today.  

Happy 4th.  

HP

evaluations; and further on the too casuals

On the "too casuals" post, I was trying to get across that you need to be cautious about slang, digs, curses - I don't think that is particularly radical.  It is one thing if you have a close working relationship with someone and you are in a fairly comfortable one on one situation, but it is another entirely when you don't know someone very well and you might do or say something they find offensive.  Case in point, which I think I've mentioned before, the religious client.  I worked with a GC who, as time went on, I learned was deeply religious.  Bible studies classes, Sunday school teacher, etc.  Very clean living.  Thus, I made an extra effort to avoid words phrases like "if the company takes this route you could get screwed," in favor of the more general "the company could face some penalties if you take this route."  In any event, I wouldn't say screwed to any client b/c it is not professional and I don't know some of them well enough to throw that out there.  I was just saying that you should be cautious.  In this precarious legal market, why give people reasons to question your judgment?  What is the big deal with remembering that this is a professional environment and you should always keep that in mind?  

Some of you may be getting to a mid-point during your summer associate terms.  Have you received input?  I like firms that provide a mid-point evaluation. If you haven't received input on your work product, etc., ask the HP or recruiting coordinator if you could schedule a time.  If there's little things that can be fixed -- like proofing better -- that is something you could hear about now - rather than at the end of the summer, which can be cured in subsequent work product.  I know most of us don't like to hear criticism, but it is useful for this job and in the future.  If there's something you disagree with - like you followed one line of thinking because the assigning partner put it in the work assignment form - then go ahead and explain that, calmly.  Don't be overly defensive, however.  Show that you want to learn and take the opportunity to see how you can improve.  If you've had a memo marked up - see what the reviewer did - take out excess wording; break it into sections to have it read better; re-organize it?  Take some time to assess how a more experienced person improved your work product.  

Btw, HP is a bit nostalgic.  I think we are coming up next month on the first anniversary of HP's Office blog.   What shall we do to acknowledge this occasion?  

the too casuals

Hello all. Sorry I've been away for a bit.  Some work things came up, of course, I am busy with our summer program, and I just didn't have anything on my mind to write about.

One thing that came to mind that I wanted to mention is over-familiarity.  In today's more casual society, sometimes we tend to assume that a seemingly less hierarchical work environment or even one when, say, partners seem young and hip and not stiff, means that we can really let our hair down, speak as if we are speaking to our pals, and even joke in a way that we think is funny but might actually offend.  Case in point:  my friend, we will call her Partner Jennifer, had to leave for an appointment.  She ran into junior associate Ellen.  They briefly discussed something and then when Ellen saw Jennifer was leaving, Ellen made a comment about "oh I guess you don't have a lot of work to do since you get to leave early." Or something to that effect.  Similar thing happened to another person I know.   Jennifer - who is a youngish, approachable partner - was really annoyed.  First, Ellen has no idea where Jennifer is going. Jennifer may be off to a client meeting. Second, Jennifer has 15 years of experience, including long nights, weekends, holiday work.  Jennifer has busted her tush and is entitled to respect, particularly from junior attorneys.  Even if Jennifer is going home - that really is not for Ellen to comment on.  Ellen hasn't even proven herself yet.

Thus the long and short of it is to remember - and I know I've mentioned this before - these people are not your pals.  They may seem approachable and laid back but there is still a hierarchy and you need to respect that.   Be careful how casual your conversations may be.  Watch the "digs," and watch the casual language - cursing, rough slang, etc.  I've been in interviews where people throw out the F-bomb as if it is a "hello."  This gets you marked way down - actually off totally - in my book. It is about judgment.  These days, we are very sensitive to judgment red flags. Remember it is a buyer's market now.  Show us your terrific work, your potential client handling skills. Keep the slang and snide comments for another day. 

research project

Good question there from the person who asked what to do if you've got a research assignment and, despite best efforts, come up with zilch.  I thought F-3's response was right on.  In fact, the first thing I was going to say was addressed by F-3:  ask the firm's library staff.  They are usually very knowledgeable and helpful.  In fact, in my experience, befriending the library staff can really do wonders for you...they can track down all sorts of information, particularly hard to find treatises and other things like newly released laws and cases - they often have their own network of fellow librarians and (like a good concierge) can swap and trade things and call in their favors to get you what you need.  So, again, the old adage here that you should treat the office staff well - be courteous, appreciative and pleasant -- will help you shine @ the workplace.  

I've had mixed results with calling Lexis helpline.  I don't find the representatives to be that substantively helpful.  But, if you want to see if a particular search will wield any results or something like that, or formulating a search, then they can do that for you.  My preference is to find someone "on the ground" who can help get what I need or direct me.

I liked F-3's suggestion that you should keep track of how you have researched.  Oftentimes, partner X may ask: "did you look here?"  If you've been in fifty different databases or made 20 phone calls, you may not remember once you are on the spot.  Keep a notepad with you various searches and how you went about it.  That will make you look prepared and organized and will inspire in partner X confidence in your abilities to proceed with the assignment - even if there seems to be no answer.  Sometimes there is no answer.

Case in point, as a junior lawyer, I once spent hours researching something.  Couldn't find it, despite my best efforts.  I finally saw a contact name and called that person.  When I reached him and explained what I was looking for, he said "you won't find it because we never issued it, and here's why."  Light bulb in my head goes off.  Ugh, why didn't I think to call this person earlier?  Part of the problem is that (at least in my law school) we were trained to seek the answers on our own  - not to reach out to others lest there be an honor code violation or something.  All answers supposedly could be found by doing one's one research by oneself.  But in the real world, that is not how it always works.  Oftentimes, the fastest answer can be found by reaching out -- to other colleagues in the office, to staff at relevant governmental organizations, to court staff, etc.  Now, I always say to follow up and confirm whatever they are saying with your own research.  But, it is often a great place to start -- or a good mid-way point to confirm your own research or help you understand something in your research.  Law is not a solitary enterprise, it can and should be collaborative - without revealing confidences of course.

So, follow F-3's advice - by all means, talk to the library staff.  Detail for partner X the steps you have taken and ask for any further suggestions.  Show that you are organized and that you have taken initiative.  If you are unsure if certain "reaching out" contacts are allowed - on a no names basis that is, ask the assigning attorney.  "I've done a, b, and c and wanted to confirm that no further changes have taken place.  Would it be ok if I called Y on a no names basis to ask?"  

Hope all is going well this summer.