Interview Mistakes Include ‘Too Much Information Syndrome’ and Bad Suits

Careers

Interview Mistakes Include ‘Too Much Information Syndrome’ and Bad Suits

Posted Sep 3, 2008, 06:10 am CST

By Debra Cassens Weiss

Some advice on how to avoid job search mistakes sounds like common sense: Make sure there are no typos in your resume or cover letter. Get an early start on your job search, and be aware of employer deadlines. Don’t get discouraged. Circle back after rejections and ask for guidance.

And then there are some more unusual mistakes, as highlighted in a recent Legal Times article that collected job advice from career counselors at seven law schools and partners at six major law firms. One of the problems, says partner Christopher Davies of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, is “Too Much Information Syndrome.” Said Davies, “I recall thinking, 'Oh my God, I can't believe someone said that.’ ”

Julie McEvoy of Jones Day says she looks for candidates whose school work or work history shows “an ability to juggle multiple tasks and to achieve deadline-driven success." But she also questions some students’ decisions about the way they present themselves.

"Invest in a comfortable or well-fitting suit,” she told Legal Times. “A flashy or ill-fitting suit can highlight a student's lack of comfort or familiarity with a professional workplace."

She also says students need to be aware that lawyers judge students on their Facebook personas as well. "Law firms are full of Luddites, and we are amazed at what students will post about themselves on the Internet,” she says.

Partners interviewed also warned students to show enthusiasm rather than boredom, come prepared with questions, and to act professionally even with junior lawyers or staffers.

"It's important to us that people actually care about the law and not just focus on the $165,000 or whatever it is today,” said partner George Bostick of Sutherland Asbill & Brennan.

"About the worst thing a candidate can do is to ignore the junior person” in an interview, Bostick added. “One time, I had to step out to handle a client phone call, and I told them to go ahead and start. I later heard that while I was out, the guy hadn't engaged on much of anything short of shopping at Costco."

Comments

Report Abuse

Posted by Ben Lister - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 6 hours, 18 minutes ago

Here’s an idea: how about the partners at those “six major law firms” look past the ranking of the school that the applicant graduated from and stop letting admissions committees pick their applicants? This isn’t rocket science folks. Using poor filters that have no real bearing on job performance insure that a lot of nutjobs get interviews that should not have. “Yeah, he’s young, uberprivileged, borderline socially unacceptable, and his parents bought him into NU.“ “We should hire him.“ “Oh, of course, duh.“
Posted by Dan - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 5 hours, 36 minutes ago

“Julie McEvoy of Jones Day says she looks for candidates whose school work or work history shows “an ability to juggle multiple tasks and to achieve deadline-driven success.“ “

Uh, sorry, but that’s complete nonsense. If it were true, these associate-churning machines would hire parents, nontraditional law students, people who worked their way through school, people who have had other careers, etc. Instead, they hire 25-year-olds who haven’t juggled anything more than two drinks while editing a law review article for typos…
Posted by R - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 5 hours, 29 minutes ago

I have to say, the two previous posts are spot-on.
Posted by Ricardo - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 5 hours, 25 minutes ago

“It’s important to us that people actually care about the law and not just focus on the $165,000 or whatever it is today.” Wow, nice to know the boss can nonchanlantly throw such numbers around. Surprise! Say, how are those contractors in India working out?

Multi taskers are nice, but you’ll never find a deep thinker there. You’ll get stellar performance but nothing new, and that’s good in some areas of practice.

Suits: It is very important to dress in “your place” and never look better than the boss. If the firm you’re interviewing with has mandatory dress down codes, find out about it ahead of time. Find out if associates are allowed to wear cufflinks or if wearing a tie is taboo. Since you’re likely being crushed by student debt, you’re going to want this job that pays $165,000… “or whatever the going rate is these days. “ And if you’re not getting anything near $165k, just think about the wonderful amount of tedious work being sent to India so that you can spend your free time blogging.

And don’t step out of line. If your ancestors come from anywhere except Europe or Africa, you will very likely be asked either directly or in a roundabout way “Where are you from?“; which simply translates into “You’re not a real American, so be really humble and you may be lucky enough to get this job.“ At this time, if you really need the job, the best thing to do is play the part of the humble and righteous immigrant, even if your ancestors have been here for 30,000 years. Interviewers love that. It reassures them that they are still the boss in aspects of your life that have nothing to do with work. And remember that this is work and any office hierarchy begins and ends at the door.
Posted by Doug Echols - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 4 hours, 39 minutes ago

Big frims should ask interviewees if they would be willing to do 6 months of pro bono under the supervision of a more experienced lawyer. THat is the quickest way to learn to be a lawyer. IF an applicant says no, “i want to do coporate work” or whatever, they do not have the heart to be a lawyer.
Posted by Manzer - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 4 hours, 30 minutes ago

Has anyone ever got any useful information from an employer that rejected them? I tried this once and got absolutely no response. I usually find that a rejecting employer never even sends a rejection letter, even when I have interviewed with them.
Posted by Anon - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 4 hours, 7 minutes ago

Manzer:
It depends. You’ll find the signals when they’re there. If the interviewer is kind enough to give you a business card, then take it. If they invite you to call or email if you have any questions, do so after your sure you won’t be called back (approx 2 weeks).
If you know why you didn’t get a call back, address the issue head-on and ask for recommendations for the future.
Nobody, in the legal profession or elsewhere, will hold your hand about this. This is networking 101: it matters much more to your career than a 160k starting salary.
Rejection letters: if they don’t send one that reveals a certain degree of professionalism.
Posted by BL Firm Alumnus - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 3 hours, 27 minutes ago

OMG, IMO, the author is right: TMI will not get you hired, LOL, so STFU, but FYI, most BL firms are ISO those like themselves, so WTF, dress well regardless, tell others GFY, and be prepared for a rejection unless you resemble the interviewer. TTYL.
Posted by Tina - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 2 hours, 55 minutes ago

This article reflects the current law firms’ attitude towards hiring entry-level associates - they should take a look at their foreign counter-parts in Europe. When a law student graduates, they have to do 3 years of apprenticeship, much like medical residencies, once they complete their residency, they get a license to practice law. This way, a better and experienced attorney is avaialble to better serve society.

These law firms want this and that but they don’t work or collaborate with law schools. Anyone who has an iota of logic would know that for better attorneys to exist, a feedback relationship between law firms and law schools have to exist. Currently, only a handful of law schools has this type of relationship with some law firms. If school s can train future lawyers to meet the needs of law firms, the latter wouldn’t have all these ridiculous standards of screening. Honestly, today no law graduate is prepared for the real law firm work - if that way the case, we would all be able to have own law firms right after we get our license :)
Posted by Anonymous Coward - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 2 hours, 45 minutes ago

“Circle back after rejections and ask for guidance.“ Are you kidding me? These days, many firms are too nekulturny to send a rejection letter. Who actually gives substantive feedback?
Posted by Off the beaten path - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 2 hours, 28 minutes ago

Here’s a novel idea ... instead of paying a first year associate $165k to work eighty hours per week, only to burn out after a few years, why not cut their salary in half and hire TWO attorneys? They will be less fatigued, you will get better work out of them, and you will have a larger pool to recruit from when deciding who will “make partner.“
Posted by Sandra Stewart - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 2 hours, 20 minutes ago

If you’re right out of law school and want to be a trial attorney, whatever you do, don’t go work for a law firm. Get a job in the public sector, preferably the district attorney. Get trial experience and then in five years you can write your own ticket to any law firm and lateral in as a partner.

If you want to do corporate, tax, or business law, you haven’t a prayer with a big firm unless you are well connected and can bring in your own business. If you can do that, why give the big firm your business? Get some like-minded law school friends who are really bright, and also well-connected, and open your own firm.

Anyone else, consider the public sector first. After ten years there, you will be half-way to retirement, whereas you will just be perhaps being considered for partner at a law firm. And, in the law firm you will have worked 80-100 hours a week in order to bill their minimum amount (by the time they cut your hours to look good to their clients), whereas you will have actually had a life while working in the public sector. And, remember, becoming a full partner is not necessarily a good thing since you also become responsible for a share of the liabilities as well as the assets—after your buy-in.

By the way, I have been an attorney for 25 years, had my own firm, and worked for an 80-attorney law firm. I never worked in the public sector. I went for the money right out of law school. Big, big mistake.
Posted by Small Firm Owner - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 2 hours, 11 minutes ago

The big firms have their place but there is nothing like a small firm if you are really looking for experience. While the dollars may not be there, at least initially, most small firms do a great job of mentoring and if you want to actually work with clients, as opposed to being relegated to a backroom researcher, small firms are the way to go. My newest associate was representing clients in family and criminal court within three months of starting. Try and get that kind of responsibility out of the gate at a large firm! Oh, and by the way, all three of the attorneys in my firm took a non-traditional route to becoming lawyers.
Posted by Vito Tortorelli - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 2 hours, 9 minutes ago

I’ll stick my 50K a year public defender job anyday . . . and besides, I’m a real trial lawyer, not a litigator (one who sits in the corner office and dreams of trying cases).
Posted by pUBLIC sERVANT 4 LIFE - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 1 hour, 24 minutes ago

#12 about that not being burnt out at a public sector job ... are you sure about that ... I mean at BL your getting 165k a year paying your bills, eating and going on one great vacation a year, in public sector your making 40k working 80 hours a week struggling to make ends meet and the only vacation you can afford is a trip to your own one bedroom apartment ... Obviosly being in the public sector myself I’m not money driven… but being over worked and over paid just sounds better than over worked and underpaid… LOVE ALL THE POSTS BY THE WAY!
Posted by Fresh Meat - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 11 minutes ago

JAG anyone?
Posted by N. Forster - 2 months, 3 weeks, 5 days, 5 minutes ago

#15, you need to come work for the Maryland Office of the Public Defender. The salary is better than $40k (although admittedly not $165k) , the work is rewarding, the benefits great, and, perhaps most importantly, the comraderie is unbelievable.

Comparisons to large or small law firms are unfair. Everything is relative and it is simply a matter of choice.
Posted by M. Madsen - 2 months, 3 weeks, 4 days, 14 hours, 49 minutes ago

The conclusion I’ve come to is that hiring at major law firms is based on the idiosyncratic whims of the interviewer, buttressed by reference to whatever herd logic coincides with those whims. Reviewing the work these new associates produce suggests results as haphazard as the approach used to select them.
Posted by No big firms for me - 2 months, 3 weeks, 4 days, 8 hours, 8 minutes ago

I’m a recent law school graduate and I just started working for a government agency. My roommate, who just started a new job with a big law firm, got home from work at 4:30 a.m. the other day (she then left again at 7:00 a.m.). Granted, she probably makes more money than I do, but it can’t possibly be enough to compensate for that kind of treatment. Say what you will about government employees, but it allows me to have a job that I like and actually recognizes that I am a human being who needs to sleep and have a life. You couldn’t pay me enough to even bother with the big firms (and yes, I had the grades to get the interviews, I chose not to bother).
Posted by Jen DC - 2 months, 3 weeks, 4 days, 7 hours, 31 minutes ago

Posts 1 & 2 - yes, thank you! I’ll be 34 when I graduate in December, in the bottom 50% of my class with my 3.0. At first I was a bit sad about this state of affairs (bottom 50%, 3.0) but I quickly got over it because, ta dah! I *already* have a full resume and my firm - should I choose to approach one and actually am lucky enough to get hired - won’t have to train me how to dress, how to treat non-legal staffers, how to show up on time or be prepared. I know these things already because I’ve worked.

I see these 25 year olds struggling to make a one page resume out of the “substantive work” they’ve had as *interns*, then I see them in class… And I wonder what the heck these firms are hiring for. Is it good looks? The ability to drink all night, then swing by the office to put in a half day while they are getting over their hangovers?

Then there is just the plain lack of common sense. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve invited other students to networking events with Congressmen, lobbyists (I was in politics before) and other people only to receive emails asking “What should I wear?“ WHAT SHOULD YOU WEAR to cocktails with the Senator from Massachusetts? I don’t know. Better yet - don’t come. Forget I asked.

And don’t get me started on their ideas of work. My section mates started a petition because we were the only section to have two semesters of class on Friday. When they came to me, I asked them point blank exactly what law firm job they were interested in that they believed wouldn’t have hours on Friday, Saturday *and* Sunday. I got blank stares.

Law school is not for 22 year olds. I don’t think it’s for 24 year olds, unless they’ve actually left the loving embrace of mommy and daddy’s checking accounts.
Posted by Amazed in San Diego - 2 months, 3 weeks, 4 days, 2 hours, 57 minutes ago

Post # 20_Great remarks. So true, so true. I am in my 10th year of practice. I entered law school at 38 and graduated at 40. My own small firm of 3 attorneys is the happiest and most well balanced in downtown San Diego. Jen DC, you hit the nail on the head. I am proud to employ a 30 year old attorney and a 37 year attorney, both know how to dress, how to work and both appear to appreciate our small office environment. I am so proud to work with them. I am an “old gal” by their standards.
Posted by CAF - 2 months, 3 weeks, 4 days, 1 hour, 5 minutes ago

Post #2 is totally on point.
Posted by Adam - 2 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 17 hours, 34 minutes ago

#20 - AMEN! You probably just hurt someone feelings with the harsh bit of reality that you just served, but necessary nonetheless. The fact that you hurt feelings highlights one thing that you forgot: today’s law students have skin about thick as newspaper. In fact, today’s generation is more neurotic, thin-skinned, and hypersensitive than any other. Is law really that bad for new associates, or are we weakening the product going into practice and consequently increasing the gap between what long-term practioner’s expect and what newly-minted and overpaid associates are capable of delivering?

Here’s some advice from someone who has only practiced law for two years, but who has 14 years of professional experience in a field where more than just money was on the line: toughen up and stop whining. It’s not you—in fact, it’s not about you. If you spent as much time figuring out how to become a professional as you do worrying about your GPA, you’d put career services out of business. This stuff isn’t rocket science. Besides, a good GPA only gets you your first job. Few employers use grades as a discriminator against admitted attorneys seeking new opportunities. “Client development” skills, however, will move mountains. Seek a little balance in your legal education and figure out how to carry on a five-minute conversation with someone on a topic other than the coolest new legal doctrine you just learned. Clients don’t care. They want your professional services, but you’re selling yourself just as much as you’re selling your legal skills. The same holds true in the context of an interview with a law firm. It’s about connecting with people—it’s about making them like you from the get-go for reasons that they’re not even capable of explaing. It’s a skill that you have to develop—few people have it naturally. Make no mistake, however: if you’re talented enough to pick it up, you’ll never go hungry again. Anyone can be taught research. Anyone can pick up theory. Most people can make a logical argument with a little training. Some of you may understand these things faster than others. Whether you truly “get it” or not, however, has nothing to do with you intellect. It has everything to do with your social and emotional intelligence.
Posted by Law Student - 2 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 12 hours, 1 minute ago

Wow, all your comments are so refreshing and motivating.
Posted by GreenEyes - 2 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 10 hours, 16 minutes ago

As a prospective older law student, I can REALLY appreciate the desire for multi-tasking, deadline-drive abilitiy employees. I would not have gotten this far in life without these abilities!
Posted by Steven MItlitzky - 2 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 2 hours, 50 minutes ago

The author may be a fine journalist but if you click above this article on her name, you will find that she apparently only has journalism experience graduating law school.. Thus she can only repeat the spin comments she obtained during interviews. You will find your friends from law school more helpful in giving you practical suggestions.

My 16 years of legal experience consists of working for other lawyers as an associate or doing per diem work for law firms. My advice is simple. If you passed the bar exam, you will find legal work and it will happen by chance. Your law school placement office can help you with resumes and what to wear. Then just arrive on time and be yourself. Unless you are a complete social misfit you will land that first legal employment.

Once you are hired, just work very hard, believe in yourself and treat everyone well whenever you can do so in any reasonable way. People who like you and respect your skills will even unexpectedly open doors for you and really help your career. Then remember to thank them and do the same for them whenever you can.

New lawyers must beware of psychological abuse from law firms they do work for. This can take the form of demanding that certain skills be aquired in weeks without disclosing that those skills actually take years to develop. Never buy into that. If you have come this far you have what it takes to succeed.

Also beware of cheap bastards who will withold money they owe you because they know you are afraid to confront them about it when your career is just starting out. They know you want more work and a good reference. Most of these people will eventually pay up but you may have to be persistent in order to get paid. This money can involve your invoice for per diem work, expense money for travel expenses, and even in some cases with solo practitioners, back salary that was not immediately paid because of “temporary cash flow problems”.

In spite of the above warnings, don’t worry, however, because many really decent people run law firms and many experienced lawyers working for those firms enjoy helping and teaching the newer attorneys. Never be afraid to ask a more experienced attorney how to do something. Be generous with your time for the people who help you and they will be a career resource for you for life. Even some of those cheap bastards mentioned above may prove to be really helpful to your career if you are always professional in your dealings with them.

Finally, it may come as a surprise to some newcomers that the legal press only covers the highest paying corner of the legal profession and some associate pay is actually quite low. With hard work and intelligent cooperation with your collegues, however, you should eventually succeeed finacially.
Posted by Steven Mitlitzky - 2 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 2 hours, 29 minutes ago

Correction: The first sentence in comment 26 should say that the author apparently only has journalism experience SINCE graduating law school. I inadvertently left out the word “since”,

As for documents that must not have typos, such as letters to prospective employers, always print and carefully review all drafts, not just the final draft. Everything looks different on paper than it does on a computer screen and you may miss errors in documents that you only print once after working on several drafts. Ideally, if a letter or other document is really important, try not to send it the same day that you draft it. Sleep on it and you might find valuable refinements the next day. If I had a dime for every motion paper with at least one typo, that I ever saw from another law firm on a case I worked on, I would have $100.
Posted by 2l student - 2 months, 3 weeks, 2 days, 20 hours, 8 minutes ago

Thank you for the honest comments…really refreshing…
Posted by to GreenEyes - 2 months, 3 weeks, 2 days, 17 hours, 58 minutes ago

GreenEyes (et al.), hopefully you see that the big law HR depts’ lines about appreciating deadline-driven multitaskers etc are just hogwash. They’ll hire the UBER-privileged kid who has never had a job. Hate to be the one to burst your bubble of dreams, but hopefully you will have a plan B (and C and D) in store for when Big Law doesn’t bite at your resume.
Posted by Happy now - 2 months, 3 weeks, 2 days, 17 hours, 50 minutes ago

In response to Manzer (post 6), me too. I interviewed with one big law firm. Sent cards to my interviewers following up on our conversations, thanking them. Then, when I didn’t hear anything I sent a letter to the lead interviewer (CC’ing HR) asking for feedback, ie: why didn’t you choose me. Never got a response. Some months later I encountered the lead interviewer at a social function. He mocked me, saying “Well, aren’t you the persistent one.“ and joked to others that my interest in his firm bordered on stalker-ish.
(Years later, I still have a grudge and resent that interviewer and his whole *expletive* *expletive* firm.)
I’m happy now, though. I practice criminal law. I try cases that I believe in. I genuinely help people. I feel good about what I do. I don’t make a lot of money, but I’m happy with how my life turned out. (Never heard any of my classmates who went to big law suggest anything along those lines, FYI. They are miserable and bitter, even though overpaid.)
Posted by Serendipity - 2 months, 3 weeks, 2 days, 4 hours, 45 minutes ago

I agree with almost all of the practiced-attorney comments and also with the students who have posted—this kind of real-world commentary, as opposed to law-school spin, is refreshing. I started out in public interest law and am now doing tribal government work. I have enjoyed every one of my four jobs: the people have been passionate and tireless, with real personalities and empathy for others; bosses understand that personal emergencies, illnesses, and disabilities occur; brains and ability are more important than the cost of your suit; and formality has its time and place, but it is important for employees to feel comfortable. My first two jobs, admittedly, paid poorly; however, my salary has climbed steadily. And I’m still putting in maybe 50 hours a week at most, with weekend work very rarely. The health and retirement benefits have been extraordinary at all of these organizations.
Ultimately, I think, #30’s comments were the ones that most hit home for me: I have liked my jobs and, for the most part, how I am treated by my bosses and co-workers; I work with real people; I have never had to worry about billable hours; and I have time for my dogs and friends. My classmates at big firms can’t make the same claims. They have also pointed out that, when you break it down, I probably make more per hour than they do.
Posted by DP - 2 months, 3 weeks, 1 day, 23 hours, 37 minutes ago

Ahh. I appreciate the comments. Reassures me I did the right thing.
I graduated in 2003 from law school at age 34 as a second profession, worked full time during the day as an appeals nurse, was an evening student (11 credits to the day-student 15+) with an already full resume, graduated, passed the Maryland bar and even completed a clerkship with a trial judge. I then offered up my soul if only a firm would be willing to take it…after 1,000 resumes plastered up and down the eastern seaboard (no kidding, and I stopped COUNTING at 1,000) with only a handful of interviews, thankfully no one took me up on it.
When I tell my Nursing comrades this story, none believe me. Send three resumes out, and by God you get a call from some HR person somewhere or a hungry recruiter (regardless of whether it’s in any field you ever wanted or hitherto imagined).
I’m not making “$165k,“ just under $80 in fact, but my job in insurance (appeals) allows me to be advocate and husband, start a family, go home and sleep, play in various sports, spend time with family, read for fun (finally! LOL Almost never while in school).
Reading these comments just reminds me how lucky I was that those many firms, medium and “Big law” never took me up on the offer!
Posted by Glen - 2 months, 3 weeks, 1 day, 4 hours, 57 minutes ago

Ask your law librarian (I’m one) to describe, without naming names, the average level of understanding your new $160k earners (picked by admissions committees at prestigious schools) have when they start those early research assignments. Better yet, ask them during the first interview to explain how a bill becomes a law…
Posted by former biglaw - 2 months, 3 weeks, 1 day, 2 hours, 56 minutes ago

I went to a big firm after graduating law school at 23. I had worked full time for 8 months before law school. It takes a whopping month or so to learn how to be professional/an attorney if you just try. I happily took the money first thing—you can always take the major pay cut and go to the DA’s office after gaining law firmn experience. It’s a good gig if you can get it. After 3 years I went on to a small firm that only hires former biglaw associates and am getting the experience I want at less pay, but still make 6 figures. It’s not all gloom and doom.

Big law firms don’t hire older attorneys as associates because they question your ability to put up with all the bs and grunt work you have to do on the bottom of the totem pole. No way I would put up with that nonsense if I were 10 years older when I started.
Posted by Chris - 2 months, 3 weeks, 8 hours, 35 minutes ago

I really find these comments inspiring. I’m currently looking for what is called an articling placement in a law firm which after 10 months will allow me to be sworn into the Bar in Ontario. I, like many other commentators here, have worked after undergrad and then attended law school later. I travelled the world and have now completed the bar. I’ve got a huge debt to show for it but it was the best time of my life and becasue of it I met alot of amazing people, saw alot of places and gained invaluable experiences. For the past two years I’ve been out of law school I have been unsuccessful in finding articles. I’ve interviewed at everything from the big firms to the small to even in-house. I feel that feedback is almost non-existent and when you are lucky enough to actually speak to someone they tell me I was a great interview but fail to address the real issue - why didn’t you hire me? Aside, I feel that because I went to law school in Australia I get the usual why? Aren’t their school’s inferior? Basically, some of these people are very condesending and down right rude. If you call me in for an interview don’t belittle my experience. I was even asked at one firm how old I was, how long my girlfriend and I lived together, etc. Is this really relevant to the job? In the end, I lost out to people who have only completed 2 of their 3 years of law school and who almost certainly don’t have nearly half of the experience I have. Anyways, I suppose what I’m trying to say is that in today’s world, which is highly globalized and competitive, many firms appear to be in the dark ages and need to really re-evaluate what they look for in future lawyers.
Posted by MarkV - 2 months, 3 weeks, 12 minutes ago

As the General Counsel for a 2 BB Corp, I hire attorneys. There is not much help for an interviewing attorney in this article. Of course sloppy work like typo’s are not good, but that is not what we hone in on. Every interview article pirates that little gem from every other article. Here’s what we look for: Do you have experience on point or some experience that makes you valuable to us—tell us what it is. Your spin is OK if your experience is not directly on point, but give us something to evaluate. Personality fit is important. Perhaps more so in a corporate office than a large firm. Dress like you are attending an important event—forget about the dress code at the firm—unless you are interviewing in Silicon Valley. If you are better dressed than your interviewer it will not be a problem. Cool and detached might be good for fashion models, but it will get you a quick rejection here. Tell us what you do that rounds you out as a human being. Show confidence without too much ego. I agree with the previous post about successful multitasking people coming from the ranks of people who work, study, do community service etc while they are in school. They are used to finishing on time and not letting people down. We are not going to engage with a candidate who was not hired about the reasons. I don’t know where that idea came from, but it’s not from people who hire attorneys. It’s an invitation to a debate about a decision that is already made. If you are brand new to the law, from a top school or a bottom school, you have your enthusiasm and willingness to work to sell. Law Review articles are great for establishing the quality of your legal thought. Now what tells us that you can manage clients, prioritize work, know when to ask for help, be a good public representative of the company, have good common sense and some talent for understanding your client’s business. Give us examples of how that enthusiasm and work ethic has served you (or others) well. Once you get past legacies, most firms want to hire people who will make them a success. For the ones who do not view the world this way, the cycle of business will eventually grind down that firm or corporation. Being fair and courteous, selecting persons who will make you a success is not only the ethical thing to do , it is a great long term business strategy. It has been for us over 30 years.
Posted by Bill - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 6 hours, 24 minutes ago

Of course sloppy work like typo’s are not good
Posted by Q - 2 months, 2 weeks, 4 days, 15 hours, 29 minutes ago

I want to highlight and commend poster #36 for the honest and informative answer. Sounds like this “seek feedback” line from some HR people a load of hogwash. Someone who is actually in charge of hiring attorneys says “We are not going to engage with a candidate who was not hired about the reasons. I don’t know where that idea came from, but it’s not from people who hire attorneys. It’s an invitation to a debate about a decision that is already made.“

That sounds sensible to me. Anything else sounds like nonsense.

I’m curious, what is a “2BB” corporation?

Commenting has expired on this post.

ABA Journal - Law News Now

Careers