TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
TaipeiMort
Posts: 874
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm

TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby TaipeiMort » Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:04 pm

I believe that TLS understates the value of significant, relevant work experience in selecting a school. At T6 schools it enables you to get a job well below median. At T14 it enables you to get a job near median. At top 30s it enables you to get a job in the top 1/3.

I am not talking IP background. I am talking any experience you can leverage to get into a deals or business firm. If you want litigation, then this doesn't really matter (but I doubt that any of you are emotionally attached to lit at this point to the point).

slsorhls
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:50 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby slsorhls » Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:07 pm

What kind of experience are you referring to though? Would really basic work done for a large company mean anything?

User avatar
spleenworship
Posts: 4421
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:08 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby spleenworship » Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:12 pm

Actually, I think you give the upper schools too much credit. Even at a T2 WE can significantly increase your chances at landing a job.

User avatar
Samara
Posts: 3245
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 4:26 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby Samara » Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:13 pm

TaipeiMort wrote:I believe that TLS understates the value of significant, relevant work experience in selecting a school. At T6 schools it enables you to get a job well below median. At T14 it enables you to get a job near median. At top 30s it enables you to get a job in the top 1/3.

I am not talking IP background. I am talking any experience you can leverage to get into a deals or business firm. If you want litigation, then this doesn't really matter (but I doubt that any of you are emotionally attached to lit at this point to the point).

It doesn't change the relative placement of schools though, so I don't think it has much effect on which school you choose.

I agree that WE is helpful at OCI, but until you're choosing between two schools where "pretty much everyone who wants biglaw gets it" I don't think it changes anything. (And I'm not sure that two such schools exist right now.)

User avatar
Bronck
Posts: 2025
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:28 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby Bronck » Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:02 am

Samara wrote:
TaipeiMort wrote:I believe that TLS understates the value of significant, relevant work experience in selecting a school. At T6 schools it enables you to get a job well below median. At T14 it enables you to get a job near median. At top 30s it enables you to get a job in the top 1/3.

I am not talking IP background. I am talking any experience you can leverage to get into a deals or business firm. If you want litigation, then this doesn't really matter (but I doubt that any of you are emotionally attached to lit at this point to the point).

It doesn't change the relative placement of schools though, so I don't think it has much effect on which school you choose.

I agree that WE is helpful at OCI, but until you're choosing between two schools where "pretty much everyone who wants biglaw gets it" I don't think it changes anything. (And I'm not sure that two such schools exist right now.)


This.

abacus
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 2:05 am

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby abacus » Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:16 am

Samara wrote:I agree that WE is helpful at OCI, but until you're choosing between two schools where "pretty much everyone who wants biglaw gets it" I don't think it changes anything. (And I'm not sure that two such schools exist right now.)


How about HYS? Let's say that someone is choosing between SLS and HLS. HLS is a bit more iffy on the "everyone who wants it gets it" front, but SLS students seem to have their pick of firms. If someone has a couple years of moderately impressive work experience, does that minimize the relatively higher risk of choosing HLS?

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3142
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:20 am

TaipeiMort wrote:I believe that TLS understates the value of significant, relevant work experience in selecting a school. At T6 schools it enables you to get a job well below median. At T14 it enables you to get a job near median. At top 30s it enables you to get a job in the top 1/3.

I am not talking IP background. I am talking any experience you can leverage to get into a deals or business firm. If you want litigation, then this doesn't really matter (but I doubt that any of you are emotionally attached to lit at this point to the point).

This would mean that Chicago can't place all below median people in good jobs, and I know from your prior posts that simply isn't true, so I don't know what to make of this new information.

slsorhls
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:50 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby slsorhls » Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:20 am

How about HYS? Let's say that someone is choosing between SLS and HLS. HLS is a bit more iffy on the "everyone who wants it gets it" front, but SLS students seem to have their pick of firms. If someone has a couple years of moderately impressive work experience, does that minimize the relatively higher risk of choosing HLS?


Where is the evidence that HLS is iffy on this? I've heard a lot of that on TLS, but I don't see the evidence to back it up. I think over 90% of people at HLS get offers. And those who strike out usually strike out because of bad bidding strategy (only going for the most prestigious firms or overly narrow in geographic diversity).

A person who interviews poorly and is below the median is probably better off at HLS if anything--more firms from across the country participate in OCI. On the other hand, that person could be the same at either. Interviewers won't think "oh, this person is creepy and below the median, but because he goes to SLS, we'll take him over a comparable HLS student." That sounds ridiculous. They'd be just as willing to reject in either case.

Perhaps your thought is that SLS would do a better job of helping each and every student? I think a student with a good/realistic bidding strategy is going to have at least an equally good shot coming from either school.

poe
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 12:23 am

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby poe » Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:22 am

If I have no relevant work experience, are my job prospects/options going to be seriously limited (coming out of a T6)?

User avatar
TaipeiMort
Posts: 874
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby TaipeiMort » Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:27 am

Bronck wrote:
Samara wrote:
TaipeiMort wrote:I believe that TLS understates the value of significant, relevant work experience in selecting a school. At T6 schools it enables you to get a job well below median. At T14 it enables you to get a job near median. At top 30s it enables you to get a job in the top 1/3.

I am not talking IP background. I am talking any experience you can leverage to get into a deals or business firm. If you want litigation, then this doesn't really matter (but I doubt that any of you are emotionally attached to lit at this point to the point).

It doesn't change the relative placement of schools though, so I don't think it has much effect on which school you choose.

I agree that WE is helpful at OCI, but until you're choosing between two schools where "pretty much everyone who wants biglaw gets it" I don't think it changes anything. (And I'm not sure that two such schools exist right now.)


This.


I disagree. I think that having work experience justifies a lower-ranked school with more $$$. If you want Biglaw then you should choose Michigan with $$$ over Chicago without $ because your risk of being unemployed has been mitigated. This would be different if you value the higher career ceiling that HYS offer over the rest of the T14 (and to a lesser extent CC).

User avatar
TaipeiMort
Posts: 874
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby TaipeiMort » Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:31 am

slsorhls wrote:
How about HYS? Let's say that someone is choosing between SLS and HLS. HLS is a bit more iffy on the "everyone who wants it gets it" front, but SLS students seem to have their pick of firms. If someone has a couple years of moderately impressive work experience, does that minimize the relatively higher risk of choosing HLS?


Where is the evidence that HLS is iffy on this? I've heard a lot of that on TLS, but I don't see the evidence to back it up. I think over 90% of people at HLS get offers. And those who strike out usually strike out because of bad bidding strategy (only going for the most prestigious firms or overly narrow in geographic diversity).

A person who interviews poorly and is below the median is probably better off at HLS if anything--more firms from across the country participate in OCI. On the other hand, that person could be the same at either. Interviewers won't think "oh, this person is creepy and below the median, but because he goes to SLS, we'll take him over a comparable HLS student." That sounds ridiculous. They'd be just as willing to reject in either case.

Perhaps your thought is that SLS would do a better job of helping each and every student? I think a student with a good/realistic bidding strategy is going to have at least an equally good shot coming from either school.


Absolutely not true. Harvard's gigantic class brings the risk of failing to above Yale, Stanford, and Chicago:

From the following thread (Comparison between Harvard and Chicago):
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=178139&start=25
"
Employment: (HLS/Chicago, Numbers then Percentages)
Number of Unemployed: 19/4 (.032/.02)

"Law Firms": 349/138 (.59/.71)

Mean Salary: (119,685/122,796)

Clerkships: (20.1 percent versus 14.1 percent)
Finally something where Harvard has the advantage... wait, the suprising element of that calculation:
Percentage State TTT Clerkships versus A3 Clerkships (Non-prestigous wash-out clerkships versus Real) :

Harvard: 27-percent (32 People)
Chicago: 11-percent (3 People)

So, I guess it may effect the calculus that 32 people at Harvard are working clerkships that T3 and 4 regional kids gun for. I mean, you could argue some are in Delaware, but not many.

Finally, a TOTAL Washout number:
(Went for another Graduate Degree (not a dual degree like a JD/MBA, which isn't included in these numbers), Unemployed, State TTT Clerkships):

Harvard: (13+19+32)= 64 People Screwed, or Roughly 11 Percent of the class.

Chicago: (0+4+3)= 7, or 3.6 Percent of the Class.

To summarize, Harvard graduate 57 more screwed people that Chicago last year.
....

Sources:
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/prospective/employmentdata
--LinkRemoved-- ... index.html
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog ... where.html"

User avatar
TaipeiMort
Posts: 874
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby TaipeiMort » Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:34 am

poe wrote:If I have no relevant work experience, are my job prospects/options going to be seriously limited (coming out of a T6)?


Differentiator is skilled self-marketing, not real experience for about half the class.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby 09042014 » Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:34 am

This is pointless to argue about. How firms value "value of significant, relevant work experience" wildly varies and doesn't appear to significantly change the calculus on where to go to school.

Very few people have "value of significant, relevant work experience" in law school. Even in schools like Northwestern that require W/E.

abacus
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 2:05 am

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby abacus » Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:45 am

slsorhls wrote:
How about HYS? Let's say that someone is choosing between SLS and HLS. HLS is a bit more iffy on the "everyone who wants it gets it" front, but SLS students seem to have their pick of firms. If someone has a couple years of moderately impressive work experience, does that minimize the relatively higher risk of choosing HLS?


Where is the evidence that HLS is iffy on this? I've heard a lot of that on TLS, but I don't see the evidence to back it up. I think over 90% of people at HLS get offers. And those who strike out usually strike out because of bad bidding strategy (only going for the most prestigious firms or overly narrow in geographic diversity).

A person who interviews poorly and is below the median is probably better off at HLS if anything--more firms from across the country participate in OCI. On the other hand, that person could be the same at either. Interviewers won't think "oh, this person is creepy and below the median, but because he goes to SLS, we'll take him over a comparable HLS student." That sounds ridiculous. They'd be just as willing to reject in either case.

Perhaps your thought is that SLS would do a better job of helping each and every student? I think a student with a good/realistic bidding strategy is going to have at least an equally good shot coming from either school.


I think that in the example you brought up (a creepy and bad interviewer), that person is a rare case and will probably get screwed regardless. I'm more concerned about someone who is fine but doesn't really stand out from the rest of her classmates in terms of interviewing skills/academic record. This person would generally be better off interviewing for big firms at SLS because there will be fewer classmates that are just like her and because SLS students are generally a hotter commodity (especially on the East Coast) due to their rarity relative to HLS kids. However, I am wondering if a couple of years of good work experience would help this person get similar results out of HLS.

User avatar
TaipeiMort
Posts: 874
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby TaipeiMort » Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:53 am

Desert Fox wrote:This is pointless to argue about. How firms value "value of significant, relevant work experience" wildly varies and doesn't appear to significantly change the calculus on where to go to school.

Very few people have "value of significant, relevant work experience" in law school. Even in schools like Northwestern that require W/E.


I think for business roles (HR, Tax, VC, PE, Entertainment, Media, etc.) this means something relevant... you've worked within their industry or worked in a job which shows interest in their industry, or have developed competencies which are valued in their industry, or have done something to show that you'll be a great relationship manager-- sales or language competencies.

In deals roles (M&A and capital markets) having done something significant (worked for Mckinsey, Bain, Goldman, Military elite) are a leg up because they can market your acumen and prestige to their gigantic clients. In the same line, HYP and URM gives a boost at these firms.

Litigation firms don't care.

User avatar
Bronck
Posts: 2025
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:28 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby Bronck » Fri Mar 16, 2012 12:56 am

Yeah, because a lot of us have worked at places like Goldman before law school. This thread is stupid.

User avatar
TaipeiMort
Posts: 874
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby TaipeiMort » Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:03 am

Bronck wrote:Yeah, because a lot of us have worked at places like Goldman before law school. This thread is stupid.


No, but if you target firms with business practices you should be able to build up a resume which targets what those firms are looking for. I received callbacks from every business firm I interviewed with except for a couple, which I wasn't able to tailor my background to. The key is being able to self-market the relevant experience you have. If you don't have any relevant experience, target deals or litigation.

Business firms are looking for fit. Deals firms are looking for prestige. Litigation firms are looking for brains.

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3142
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:25 am

TaipeiMort wrote:
Bronck wrote:Yeah, because a lot of us have worked at places like Goldman before law school. This thread is stupid.


No, but if you target firms with business practices you should be able to build up a resume which targets what those firms are looking for. I received callbacks from every business firm I interviewed with except for a couple, which I wasn't able to tailor my background to. The key is being able to self-market the relevant experience you have. If you don't have any relevant experience, target deals or litigation.

Business firms are looking for fit. Deals firms are looking for prestige. Litigation firms are looking for brains.

So what is your professional background, and to what extent do you believe that background should have impacted your choice of school? All you are saying so far in this thread is that having had a good job in the past will make you more employable in the future. Thanks.

Edit: Or, apparently, not even having a good job, but tailoring your resume to fit specific firms' practice strengths? Seriously, what is your point.

slsorhls
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:50 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby slsorhls » Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:38 am

Absolutely not true. Harvard's gigantic class brings the risk of failing to above Yale, Stanford, and Chicago:


Your post is basically Chicago trolling garbage.

The comparison should be between student A's chances out of HLS vs. other schools, not a comparison about students in general. Do you understand the difference? The overall numbers are just a tool to help us answer the question about student A, and sometimes it's a weak tool. For various reasons, the students at the bottom of the much larger pool at HLS may in fact be of lesser quality than the students at the bottom of Chicago (although I don't think this is true). Then better outcomes for those students would be justified. And it would tell us nothing about student A and whether he has better chances coming from HLS or Chicago.

One other thing: at HLS, you can't really tell who is at the bottom and who isn't. No real grades. Can't say the same for Chicago. I think that alone is enough to more than justify choosing HLS over Chicago. Say you are at the bottom of your class. At Chicago, it will be very obvious. At HLS, it may not be.

Comparing outcomes at the bottom is a bad idea anyway. We should be comparing students at the median. That makes much more sense. And in that case, it's clear the HLS grad will have more opportunities.

slsorhls
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:50 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby slsorhls » Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:39 am

SLS students are generally a hotter commodity (especially on the East Coast) due to their rarity relative to HLS kids. However, I am wondering if a couple of years of good work experience would help this person get similar results out of HLS.


Over and over I've seen this claim put forward on TLS--that SLS students have an edge on the East Coast because of the rarity of the degree. I think that is 100% false. I've never seen any data that support it, and it defies common sense.

Common sense is that nothing beats Harvard when it comes to East Coast biglaw or big-anything. I can see a good argument actually for some firms questioning an SLS grad's commitment to working and staying on the East Coast if he's spent his entire life in California. Meanwhile, no one is going to question someone who went to Harvard. Harvard is Harvard. Harvard and Yale are truly the only two law schools where opportunities abound across the country, and students really spread out (and for Harvard arguably all over the world). SLS students self-select to stay in California largely.

I'm more concerned about someone who is fine but doesn't really stand out from the rest of her classmates in terms of interviewing skills/academic record. This person would generally be better off interviewing for big firms at SLS because there will be fewer classmates that are just like her


I don't think the average student at HLS or SLS is going to have trouble landing a good job. Any difference will be on the margins. Again, from what I've seen, students who strike out at HLS strike out because of bad bidding strategy and/or personality traits/bad interviewing (i.e. creepy, not just average).

User avatar
TaipeiMort
Posts: 874
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby TaipeiMort » Fri Mar 16, 2012 2:01 am

dixiecupdrinking wrote:
TaipeiMort wrote:
Bronck wrote:Yeah, because a lot of us have worked at places like Goldman before law school. This thread is stupid.


No, but if you target firms with business practices you should be able to build up a resume which targets what those firms are looking for. I received callbacks from every business firm I interviewed with except for a couple, which I wasn't able to tailor my background to. The key is being able to self-market the relevant experience you have. If you don't have any relevant experience, target deals or litigation.

Business firms are looking for fit. Deals firms are looking for prestige. Litigation firms are looking for brains.

So what is your professional background, and to what extent do you believe that background should have impacted your choice of school? All you are saying so far in this thread is that having had a good job in the past will make you more employable in the future. Thanks.

Edit: Or, apparently, not even having a good job, but tailoring your resume to fit specific firms' practice strengths? Seriously, what is your point.


I think that I fit well at Chicago because my background was international business and entrepreneurial (don't want to out myself, but consulting, operations, financial manager, start-up work)-- which made me more unique. Many of my classmates either had prestige jobs (good fit with "deals" firms whose clients demand the best pedigrees) or academic/high grades (litigation where your brain-power is important even at the beginning) covered, so I found it relatively easy to differentiate myself at business (tax, VC, PE, and soft-IP) firms where fewer people were focusing. I think this advantage is mitigated at bigger schools or schools with lots of people with particular industry experience (Penn and NU).

Tailoring works well with firms that care about fit (the aforementioned "business" firms which serve a particular type of client). Tailoring doesn't work as well with lit and deals firms because they serve all types of clients across industries and you wont be getting client contact at these firms for quite some time so the whole fit element matters less. At a business firm you may be assisting a partner with 10 clients. At a deals firm you may be 1 of 100 on a M&A deal.

My main point is that if you are already going to be gunning for firms where you are valued (eg. start-up experience), you probably don't need to go to Harvard or Yale if you get into Berkeley because you probably have already effectively locked down a job in a Silicon Valley VC firm based on your experience.

User avatar
TaipeiMort
Posts: 874
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby TaipeiMort » Fri Mar 16, 2012 2:16 am

slsorhls wrote:
Absolutely not true. Harvard's gigantic class brings the risk of failing to above Yale, Stanford, and Chicago:


Your post is basically Chicago trolling garbage.

The comparison should be between student A's chances out of HLS vs. other schools, not a comparison about students in general. Do you understand the difference? The overall numbers are just a tool to help us answer the question about student A, and sometimes it's a weak tool. For various reasons, the students at the bottom of the much larger pool at HLS may in fact be of lesser quality than the students at the bottom of Chicago (although I don't think this is true). Then better outcomes for those students would be justified. And it would tell us nothing about student A and whether he has better chances coming from HLS or Chicago.

One other thing: at HLS, you can't really tell who is at the bottom and who isn't. No real grades. Can't say the same for Chicago. I think that alone is enough to more than justify choosing HLS over Chicago. Say you are at the bottom of your class. At Chicago, it will be very obvious. At HLS, it may not be.

Comparing outcomes at the bottom is a bad idea anyway. We should be comparing students at the median. That makes much more sense. And in that case, it's clear the HLS grad will have more opportunities.


The data I referenced hows that almost 60 more people at Harvard didn't get real jobs over Chicago. That is school-released data. The difference isn't student quality. HLS students usually have better numbers (albeit also suffer from an occasionally diluted education). The problem is that both schools place across the country, and Chicago has many fewer to place, and almost twice as many partners per-capita in firms. HLS will always have more without a job, because they have so many to place. Firms will take one Chicago person. They may not take two Harvard people for every Chicago person.

Also, in reference to your crazy "Harvard and Yale are the only two true national schools":

http://www.law.uchicago.edu/prospective/employmentdata
http://www.law.harvard.edu/current/care ... index.html

Review them. You will see that Chicago students are more dispersed. This could mean that Chicago has more people self-selecting to non-NY/Chicago/DC markets. It could also mean that more people are forced to go other places beside these markets to find jobs. I believe it is the first. It is much easier to get a V10 job in NYC than it is to get a V60 job in Denver or Seattle.

User avatar
Bronck
Posts: 2025
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:28 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby Bronck » Fri Mar 16, 2012 2:22 am

Diluted faculty, amirite?

You are the most insufferable troll on here.

Mal Reynolds
Posts: 12630
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:16 am

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby Mal Reynolds » Fri Mar 16, 2012 2:34 am

Bronck wrote:Diluted faculty, amirite?

You are the most insufferable troll on here.


It was only a matter of time. I didn't have high hopes for this thread but I was hoping it wouldn't turn in to one of these.

User avatar
Bronck
Posts: 2025
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 1:28 pm

Re: TLS' Ignored Factor in Picking a School: Own Work Experience

Postby Bronck » Fri Mar 16, 2012 2:38 am

Mal Reynolds wrote:
Bronck wrote:Diluted faculty, amirite?

You are the most insufferable troll on here.


It was only a matter of time. I didn't have high hopes for this thread but I was hoping it wouldn't turn in to one of these.


What else can you expect from a Taipei thread?




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest