V15 Partner/OCI Interviewer Answering Questions... Forum

[roranoa]

Do you care about where someone worked before law school?

I mean, I've heard that people who went to prestigious consulting/investment firms are seen favorably but what about the rest who just had simple office jobs at some place you never heard about. Let's say, a department store at some place or some type of trading company, or maybe a paper company like Dunder Milflin(not real)? Does name value of the company matter to you?

+ 1. Also, what about people who are at the top of their class but have no work experience whatsoever?

I think top of the class is always more meaningful than work experience (with nudges for relatively equivalent).

If I had to rank amongst options, it's probably top-tier WE (investment bank, top consulting firm, etc.), reasonably-good sounding work experience (company I'm reasonably familiar with, etc.), no work experience, "bad" work experience.

But nothing in the foreoging is something a good or bad interview can't swing.

Any examples of "bad" work experience? Apologies if you already addressed this earlier.

I would also like to know about "bad" work experience. What about work experiences of international students (such as myself) who worked somewhere you don't know about? Or is "bad"/"good" more about the position one held at the workplace?

[Anonymous User]

Do lateral candidates usually include their law school GPA on their resumes when they apply to lateral to your firm? I'm at UVA and UVA doesn't give honors outside of the top 10% (coif) but I'll be pretty close to top 15% if I maintained my GPA during my last semester of law school. Should I include my GPA on my resume if I apply to lateral positions in the next 3 years? When do people start leaving their GPA off of their resume?

[itbdvorm]

Do you care about where someone worked before law school?

I mean, I've heard that people who went to prestigious consulting/investment firms are seen favorably but what about the rest who just had simple office jobs at some place you never heard about. Let's say, a department store at some place or some type of trading company, or maybe a paper company like Dunder Milflin(not real)? Does name value of the company matter to you?

+ 1. Also, what about people who are at the top of their class but have no work experience whatsoever?

I think top of the class is always more meaningful than work experience (with nudges for relatively equivalent).

If I had to rank amongst options, it's probably top-tier WE (investment bank, top consulting firm, etc.), reasonably-good sounding work experience (company I'm reasonably familiar with, etc.), no work experience, "bad" work experience.

But nothing in the foreoging is something a good or bad interview can't swing.

Any examples of "bad" work experience? Apologies if you already addressed this earlier.

It's really a "know it when you see it" kind of thing. If you were pumping gas or working as a folder in a dept. store, for example, not really that helpful if i'm trying to assess your brainpower (though may demonstrate you're willing to work hard)

[itbdvorm]

Do lateral candidates usually include their law school GPA on their resumes when they apply to lateral to your firm? I'm at UVA and UVA doesn't give honors outside of the top 10% (coif) but I'll be pretty close to top 15% if I maintained my GPA during my last semester of law school. Should I include my GPA on my resume if I apply to lateral positions in the next 3 years? When do people start leaving their GPA off of their resume?

most places will ask for your transcript up to a few years out anyway. law school grades stop mattering much though once you get past a certain point...

[TyrionLannister]

It's really a "know it when you see it" kind of thing. If you were pumping gas or working as a folder in a dept. store, for example, not really that helpful if i'm trying to assess your brainpower (though may demonstrate you're willing to work hard)

Thanks for the reply. All of the following should be prefaced by saying that I totally get how an solid interview makes up for a lot of this, but I had some further questions just out of curiosity.

I definitely see how this unrelated WE would not translate into any accurate measurement of an applicant's brainpower or lawyering skills, but (just going off how you ranked them) would such WE actually be considered worse than never working at all? I guess I was just curious as to how you ranked WE and listed "Bad" below "none at all". If "bad"= "unrelated", then you would rank a K-JD applicant who never worked before even slightly better than someone who has maintained unrelated employment for a period of time? If "bad" meant something like "exotic dancer" or "personal escort" or "collection agent for bookie", then the ranking is obvious. Just curious and would love a clarification.

[Anonymous User]

Rising 3L here at a T10 school, fairly below median, hopefully raised the GPA a bit this semester. Struck out on a SA position through OCI/Mass-mailing. Managed to snag a fairly interesting/cool international internship in the practice areas I want to work in (think corporate), and wanted to know how I should best go about trying to land a position at a firm, if that's even possible, as a 3L or post-grad after passing the bar and how best to do this despite the grades issue.

I remember you mentioning the brand name of schools in the earlier discussion of T30 law review vs. below median T10 and I wanted to see if there is any way to use that, as well as a fairly interesting/unique resume, fairly good social skills/personality/interviewing ability to snag a position. Thank you!

[itbdvorm]

It's really a "know it when you see it" kind of thing. If you were pumping gas or working as a folder in a dept. store, for example, not really that helpful if i'm trying to assess your brainpower (though may demonstrate you're willing to work hard)

Thanks for the reply. All of the following should be prefaced by saying that I totally get how an solid interview makes up for a lot of this, but I had some further questions just out of curiosity.

I definitely see how this unrelated WE would not translate into any accurate measurement of an applicant's brainpower or lawyering skills, but (just going off how you ranked them) would such WE actually be considered worse than never working at all? I guess I was just curious as to how you ranked WE and listed "Bad" below "none at all". If "bad"= "unrelated", then you would rank a K-JD applicant who never worked before even slightly better than someone who has maintained unrelated employment for a period of time? If "bad" meant something like "exotic dancer" or "personal escort" or "collection agent for bookie", then the ranking is obvious. Just curious and would love a clarification.

if you go straight through, you'll give off a little more of a mission, directed, etc., vibe. what am i to make of someone who works as a secretary, or a clerk, or something in the interim? i just don't know.

[itbdvorm]

Rising 3L here at a T10 school, fairly below median, hopefully raised the GPA a bit this semester. Struck out on a SA position through OCI/Mass-mailing. Managed to snag a fairly interesting/cool international internship in the practice areas I want to work in (think corporate), and wanted to know how I should best go about trying to land a position at a firm, if that's even possible, as a 3L or post-grad after passing the bar and how best to do this despite the grades issue.

I remember you mentioning the brand name of schools in the earlier discussion of T30 law review vs. below median T10 and I wanted to see if there is any way to use that, as well as a fairly interesting/unique resume, fairly good social skills/personality/interviewing ability to snag a position. Thank you!

things are always possible. but i'd be working back/different channels rather than putting all your eggs in 3L OCI. career srevices, professors you bond with, 3Ls on your journal, etc. hustle, hustle, hustle. until you have a job, you haven't pursued every available opportunity.

[roranoa]

It's really a "know it when you see it" kind of thing. If you were pumping gas or working as a folder in a dept. store, for example, not really that helpful if i'm trying to assess your brainpower (though may demonstrate you're willing to work hard)

Thanks for the reply. All of the following should be prefaced by saying that I totally get how an solid interview makes up for a lot of this, but I had some further questions just out of curiosity.

I definitely see how this unrelated WE would not translate into any accurate measurement of an applicant's brainpower or lawyering skills, but (just going off how you ranked them) would such WE actually be considered worse than never working at all? I guess I was just curious as to how you ranked WE and listed "Bad" below "none at all". If "bad"= "unrelated", then you would rank a K-JD applicant who never worked before even slightly better than someone who has maintained unrelated employment for a period of time? If "bad" meant something like "exotic dancer" or "personal escort" or "collection agent for bookie", then the ranking is obvious. Just curious and would love a clarification.

if you go straight through, you'll give off a little more of a mission, directed, etc., vibe. what am i to make of someone who works as a secretary, or a clerk, or something in the interim? i just don't know.

I have three follow up questions:

1. When you say that you would rank and judge applicants with their WE the way you do, is that a personal decision or is there some sort of official guideline that HR at your firm sets out?

2. Would lack of "good" WE or having a "bad" WE be looked over if the applicant has good grades from a good school?

3. If two applicants are basically indistinguishable except for their WE, would the applicant with the lesser WE be able to overcome his/her vulnerability with a good engaging interview? Would that be possible at your firm?

Thanks for all the help by the way.

[Anonymous User]

Is it pretty much expected that a candidate be at least on a secondary journal if not on law review?

[itbdvorm]

It's really a "know it when you see it" kind of thing. If you were pumping gas or working as a folder in a dept. store, for example, not really that helpful if i'm trying to assess your brainpower (though may demonstrate you're willing to work hard)

Thanks for the reply. All of the following should be prefaced by saying that I totally get how an solid interview makes up for a lot of this, but I had some further questions just out of curiosity.

I definitely see how this unrelated WE would not translate into any accurate measurement of an applicant's brainpower or lawyering skills, but (just going off how you ranked them) would such WE actually be considered worse than never working at all? I guess I was just curious as to how you ranked WE and listed "Bad" below "none at all". If "bad"= "unrelated", then you would rank a K-JD applicant who never worked before even slightly better than someone who has maintained unrelated employment for a period of time? If "bad" meant something like "exotic dancer" or "personal escort" or "collection agent for bookie", then the ranking is obvious. Just curious and would love a clarification.

if you go straight through, you'll give off a little more of a mission, directed, etc., vibe. what am i to make of someone who works as a secretary, or a clerk, or something in the interim? i just don't know.

I have three follow up questions:

1. When you say that you would rank and judge applicants with their WE the way you do, is that a personal decision or is there some sort of official guideline that HR at your firm sets out?

2. Would lack of "good" WE or having a "bad" WE be looked over if the applicant has good grades from a good school?

3. If two applicants are basically indistinguishable except for their WE, would the applicant with the lesser WE be able to overcome his/her vulnerability with a good engaging interview? Would that be possible at your firm?

Thanks for all the help by the way.

It's a personal decision. I think I answered your other two questions previously, but grades + interview generally trump all. I include "WE" as part of the "interview" in reality because it's all about painting a picture of who you are that's separate from what your grades say. But no WE is too good or too bad to affect good/bad grades or good/bad interview to such an extent that we wouldn't callback / hire. But terrible grades/terrible interview can kill a candidacy dead.

[itbdvorm]

Is it pretty much expected that a candidate be at least on a secondary journal if not on law review?

Kinda, yeah. I'm generally a little surprised if someone isn't, though the whole thing's pretty silly.

[Anonymous User]

I realize you are at a firm, but I'm sure many of your colleagues have gone in-house. Can you speak to their experiences?

In particular, my biggest concerns are the pay cut, whether it will provide room for career growth and whether it will be interesting. I'm a deal lawyer who enjoys deals, but a couple years down the line when I have a family I'm not sure whether I'll be able to continue to juggle the long hours of firm life and want to start doing my research early. I'm sure it varies position to position, but if you could talk about the types of positions friends have taken and their experiences it would be very helpful, so when I am in a position to make the decision, I can assess good in-house jobs from bad ones. Ideally, all I want to do is take home $200K (I realize this won't be starting salary...but have the room to grow to this), do deals and not work 60-70 hour weeks. I feel like my hopes of this future are unrealistic though. Any insight is much appreciated - great thread.

it really, truly, completely depends job to job. you need to have frank conversations about the company, growth potential, etc. part of the issue is what level you go in at, how big the company is, who is above/below you, how big the legal dept is, what kind of relationships they have with other functional groups. what you're suggesting is pretty reasonable in theory. but "doing deals" and not working long weeks from time to time i think is fundamentally in contradiction. if you're on a big deal, you're going to pull some long hours. just the way it is.

Thanks for the reply. Understood - I realize long hours during an intense deal comes with the territory. I meant I didn't want to average 60-70 hour weeks throughout the course of the year. During the heat of a deal, I don't mind long hours.

I realize it really varies, but do you have a sense for a rough salary range for your classmates who went in-house (or from in-house solicitations you may have received through headhunters)...excluding the outliers? I ask in part for financial planning purposes.

[itbdvorm]

I realize you are at a firm, but I'm sure many of your colleagues have gone in-house. Can you speak to their experiences?

In particular, my biggest concerns are the pay cut, whether it will provide room for career growth and whether it will be interesting. I'm a deal lawyer who enjoys deals, but a couple years down the line when I have a family I'm not sure whether I'll be able to continue to juggle the long hours of firm life and want to start doing my research early. I'm sure it varies position to position, but if you could talk about the types of positions friends have taken and their experiences it would be very helpful, so when I am in a position to make the decision, I can assess good in-house jobs from bad ones. Ideally, all I want to do is take home $200K (I realize this won't be starting salary...but have the room to grow to this), do deals and not work 60-70 hour weeks. I feel like my hopes of this future are unrealistic though. Any insight is much appreciated - great thread.

it really, truly, completely depends job to job. you need to have frank conversations about the company, growth potential, etc. part of the issue is what level you go in at, how big the company is, who is above/below you, how big the legal dept is, what kind of relationships they have with other functional groups. what you're suggesting is pretty reasonable in theory. but "doing deals" and not working long weeks from time to time i think is fundamentally in contradiction. if you're on a big deal, you're going to pull some long hours. just the way it is.

Thanks for the reply. Understood - I realize long hours during an intense deal comes with the territory. I meant I didn't want to average 60-70 hour weeks throughout the course of the year. During the heat of a deal, I don't mind long hours.

I realize it really varies, but do you have a sense for a rough salary range for your classmates who went in-house (or from in-house solicitations you may have received through headhunters)...excluding the outliers? I ask in part for financial planning purposes.

Really hard to say. Depends hugely on market, company, position, etc. Assume most positions if you're staying in the city will drop you back to approximately first year salary (+/- ~20-30%). More "important" positions could be as much as double existing salary. Again...big ranges.

[Anonymous User]

Say someone who goes to a t-30 and got good enough grades to transfer up to CCN, but one of the main reasons for transfering is because not that many powerhouse firms do OCI at that school. Should that person transfer or stay at that school and just email blast their resume to firms that dont do OCI?

[itbdvorm]

Say someone who goes to a t-30 and got good enough grades to transfer up to CCN, but one of the main reasons for transfering is because not that many powerhouse firms do OCI at that school. Should that person transfer or stay at that school and just email blast their resume to firms that dont do OCI?

wish i knew the answer to this one for sure. ignoring OCI, you should try to find out where 2Ls w/top grades from your school are working (and ask them if they know transfers, where they went, how they did, etc.).

[Anonymous User]

What type of knowledge about your firm impresses you in an interview? Put another way, what are some non-generic facts that interviewees have impressed you with?

If you don't interview, just potential associates in general.

[tedalbany]

1) Is there anything a law student could do to work on leadership skills, or do you think it's more of an innate trait?

2) How much socialization is required? What kind of social skills (or lack thereof) will cause it to be held against you (either in advancement, Associate offers, etc)? I'm not the socially awkward type in that I usually say wildly inappropriate things, weird people out, etc... but I am fairly introverted and it takes a while for me to warm up to a new work environment, so I'm not sure how much this will hinder me.

[Anonymous User]

I'm a 2012 graduate of UCLA/UT and am going to a small firm (commercial lit, not a personal injury/plaintiff employment). Is it ever possible to move up into biglaw? I have a biglaw resume (great grades, publication, good work experience, EIC of secondary) but didn't do a biglaw SA. My best guess would be to hustle and slowly go up in firm size until being a lateral doesn't seem as ridiculous, and of course keep my biglaw contacts active. Thoughts?

[itbdvorm]

I'm a 2012 graduate of UCLA/UT and am going to a small firm (commercial lit, not a personal injury/plaintiff employment). Is it ever possible to move up into biglaw? I have a biglaw resume (great grades, publication, good work experience, EIC of secondary) but didn't do a biglaw SA. My best guess would be to hustle and slowly go up in firm size until being a lateral doesn't seem as ridiculous, and of course keep my biglaw contacts active. Thoughts?

If you want to do biglaw lit, I think your best bet is to go clerk, ideally in market where you want to work. fed. district or appellate (obviously harder) will give you entree into a very wide range of biglaw opportunities.

[lucield]

Thanks so much for doıng thıs thread!

im a risıng 2L and will be interning for in house counsel at a major union thıs summer. i have two questıons stemming from thıs internship

1) does working at a union raise any potential red flags for big firms? not to get political, but unıons generally generate strong emotions regardless of one's stance, and i cant help but think corporate big firms might be unenthusiastic about union involvement. however, another part of me thinks that ıs ludicrous. opinions?

2) from an interview perspective, does the employment law background to union work weigh against me? im interested in corporate transactional law, but ive always been interested in the work unions do and felt that experiencing it for my 1L summer was fine even though ı dont want to practice it. do you think it should be fine as long as i can explain in the interview what attracted me to the internship but also why i dont want to practice it and instead want to practice at x firm?

Thanks!

[itbdvorm]

Thanks so much for doıng thıs thread!

im a risıng 2L and will be interning for in house counsel at a major union thıs summer. i have two questıons stemming from thıs internship

1) does working at a union raise any potential red flags for big firms? not to get political, but unıons generally generate strong emotions regardless of one's stance, and i cant help but think corporate big firms might be unenthusiastic about union involvement. however, another part of me thinks that ıs ludicrous. opinions?

2) from an interview perspective, does the employment law background to union work weigh against me? im interested in corporate transactional law, but ive always been interested in the work unions do and felt that experiencing it for my 1L summer was fine even though ı dont want to practice it. do you think it should be fine as long as i can explain in the interview what attracted me to the internship but also why i dont want to practice it and instead want to practice at x firm?

Thanks!

I don't think either of these things are big deals. Sounds like a quality experience, you'll be fine so long as you don't sound crazy in an interview.

[jarofsoup]

As a transfer student what should I expect at OCI and does transferring raise concerns.

[itbdvorm]

As a transfer student what should I expect at OCI and does transferring raise concerns.

This question is way too broad. Where are you transferring from/to? What context are you talking about in terms of what to expect?

[Grad1234]

If I accepted a clerkship with a state judge and later that state judge went to make an 18 month stint in the family law division of the court (meaning that I would spend a year and a half of my two year clerkship doing family law), would you consider me pigeon-holed at that point even though I don't want to practice family law? Is it enough that at least 6 months of my clerkship would be spent dealing with a general civil and criminal docket?