V15 Partner/OCI Interviewer Answering Questions...

[roranoa]

Before I get started, mind you that I'm asking this because I pretty much have no idea on what a corporate lawyer really does on a daily basis so....well, I hope I don't annoy you.

I'm curious about the general nature of the work that you do. That is, does it involve a lot of (or at least some) creativity? Or is it more routine work? I'm sure every deal is different (is it? I don't know) but does your work fall into a certain pattern after a few years in which you would get efficient as you get more experience under your belt or..... do you often have to approach your tasks differently?

(This question is terribly formulated, sorry. This is partly due to the fact that I don't know anything about the life of lawyers)

I guess what I want to ask is, what differentiates a good lawyer from a lawyer who would get fired soon? I mean apart from work ethic. You wrote on previous responses that even associates that don't have a chance at getting partner work their ass off, so I'm assuming work ethic isn't really an issue. Then what?


Hope you can share some wisdom.

I think the "getting it" vs. "not getting it" from a few paragraphs ago is most of it. That and leadership, human dynamics, etc. Shockingly important given how little credit people give it when thinking about the law (at least for corporate, and to be a star in many other areas too).

Thanks for the reply!

Can you tell me more about the work? Whether it's really routine or not. Does it involve a certain level of creativity? Or is it more about applying a certain set of solutions to different problems?

[Anonymous User]

Before I get started, mind you that I'm asking this because I pretty much have no idea on what a corporate lawyer really does on a daily basis so....well, I hope I don't annoy you.

I'm curious about the general nature of the work that you do. That is, does it involve a lot of (or at least some) creativity? Or is it more routine work? I'm sure every deal is different (is it? I don't know) but does your work fall into a certain pattern after a few years in which you would get efficient as you get more experience under your belt or..... do you often have to approach your tasks differently?

(This question is terribly formulated, sorry. This is partly due to the fact that I don't know anything about the life of lawyers)

I guess what I want to ask is, what differentiates a good lawyer from a lawyer who would get fired soon? I mean apart from work ethic. You wrote on previous responses that even associates that don't have a chance at getting partner work their ass off, so I'm assuming work ethic isn't really an issue. Then what?


Hope you can share some wisdom.

I think the "getting it" vs. "not getting it" from a few paragraphs ago is most of it. That and leadership, human dynamics, etc. Shockingly important given how little credit people give it when thinking about the law (at least for corporate, and to be a star in many other areas too).

Thanks for the reply!

Can you tell me more about the work? Whether it's really routine or not. Does it involve a certain level of creativity? Or is it more about applying a certain set of solutions to different problems?

On a somewhat related note - Did you like law school? Do you like your job better than law school?

[Anonymous User]

Apologies if this has been covered, but JD/MBA as a "flight risk" or a negative in any way ... any truth to that?

[Anonymous User]

Here's a relatively easy one,

If I went to a prestigious NE prep school (exeter, andover, deerfield, etc.) should I have that on my resume in the education section? I know the general rule is no info from high school but is this an exception? This would be for jobs in the Northeast.

[roranoa]

Here's a relatively easy one,

If I went to a prestigious NE prep school (exeter, andover, deerfield, etc.) should I have that on my resume in the education section? I know the general rule is no info from high school but is this an exception? This would be for jobs in the Northeast.

Wow, I don't know but, isn't that kinda snobbish??

[Morgan12Oak]

I would absolutely put that down. That's a good chunk of the reason you pay for a school like that. Wear it, flaunt it, gloat it.

[005618502]

Here's a relatively easy one,

If I went to a prestigious NE prep school (exeter, andover, deerfield, etc.) should I have that on my resume in the education section? I know the general rule is no info from high school but is this an exception? This would be for jobs in the Northeast.

Wow, I don't know but, isn't that kinda snobbish??

Lol I think the question was a joke. If not, the answer is of course not, no one gives a shit you went to school that your parents paid big bucks for which was likely of no more educational value than most good public schools. Then again, if this was a serious question, good luck in life bro!

[Anonymous User]

I am a 1L with summer offers at three different small law firms practicing employment law, family law, and entertainment law. I don't really have an interest in any of these practice areas beyond this summer (I am interested in corporate/business).

How do you view this kind of work experience during 1L summer? Does it matter that the practice of these firms don't fully reflect my future interests?

[itbdvorm]

Before I get started, mind you that I'm asking this because I pretty much have no idea on what a corporate lawyer really does on a daily basis so....well, I hope I don't annoy you.

I'm curious about the general nature of the work that you do. That is, does it involve a lot of (or at least some) creativity? Or is it more routine work? I'm sure every deal is different (is it? I don't know) but does your work fall into a certain pattern after a few years in which you would get efficient as you get more experience under your belt or..... do you often have to approach your tasks differently?

(This question is terribly formulated, sorry. This is partly due to the fact that I don't know anything about the life of lawyers)

I guess what I want to ask is, what differentiates a good lawyer from a lawyer who would get fired soon? I mean apart from work ethic. You wrote on previous responses that even associates that don't have a chance at getting partner work their ass off, so I'm assuming work ethic isn't really an issue. Then what?


Hope you can share some wisdom.

I think the "getting it" vs. "not getting it" from a few paragraphs ago is most of it. That and leadership, human dynamics, etc. Shockingly important given how little credit people give it when thinking about the law (at least for corporate, and to be a star in many other areas too).

How long does it take before you can tell if someone "gets it" or not? To that end, if someone isn't "getting it," are they given a chance to fix it or are they normally given the idea that they should leave?

I could probably tell you, with a pretty high degree of accuracy, whether someone has a chance at partner within 1-2 transactions. Even as a first year. Now "chance" doesn't mean "will" - but the people who don't are very clear. They will be given opportunities to fix it. They will not do so, and will eventually leave.

[itbdvorm]

Before I get started, mind you that I'm asking this because I pretty much have no idea on what a corporate lawyer really does on a daily basis so....well, I hope I don't annoy you.

I'm curious about the general nature of the work that you do. That is, does it involve a lot of (or at least some) creativity? Or is it more routine work? I'm sure every deal is different (is it? I don't know) but does your work fall into a certain pattern after a few years in which you would get efficient as you get more experience under your belt or..... do you often have to approach your tasks differently?

(This question is terribly formulated, sorry. This is partly due to the fact that I don't know anything about the life of lawyers)

I guess what I want to ask is, what differentiates a good lawyer from a lawyer who would get fired soon? I mean apart from work ethic. You wrote on previous responses that even associates that don't have a chance at getting partner work their ass off, so I'm assuming work ethic isn't really an issue. Then what?


Hope you can share some wisdom.

I think the "getting it" vs. "not getting it" from a few paragraphs ago is most of it. That and leadership, human dynamics, etc. Shockingly important given how little credit people give it when thinking about the law (at least for corporate, and to be a star in many other areas too).

Thanks for the reply!

Can you tell me more about the work? Whether it's really routine or not. Does it involve a certain level of creativity? Or is it more about applying a certain set of solutions to different problems?

On a somewhat related note - Did you like law school? Do you like your job better than law school?

It's both routine and not. Sometimes it's "what's market", what do people normally ask for, go look at precedent, do due diligence, etc. Sometimes it's creative, come up with a mechanism to solve issue X, come up with a power-sharing provision, etc. Every practice area has creativity involved as you get more senior. At the junior level, less so.

[itbdvorm]

I would absolutely put that down. That's a good chunk of the reason you pay for a school like that. Wear it, flaunt it, gloat it.

wrong.

the correct answer is to reach out to your school's alumni association and see if anyone from your school works at Firm X and ask if you could talk to them for a few minutes.

putting it down - unless you're on some board of something and you can use it as an activity - rubs many people the wrong way. i personally don't happen to be one of them, but know enough people who are that i'd advise against it.

[itbdvorm]

I am a 1L with summer offers at three different small law firms practicing employment law, family law, and entertainment law. I don't really have an interest in any of these practice areas beyond this summer (I am interested in corporate/business).

How do you view this kind of work experience during 1L summer? Does it matter that the practice of these firms don't fully reflect my future interests?

Entertainment law is probably more similar to corporate/business law than anything else. But doesn't really matter.

[Anonymous User]

Before I get started, mind you that I'm asking this because I pretty much have no idea on what a corporate lawyer really does on a daily basis so....well, I hope I don't annoy you.

I'm curious about the general nature of the work that you do. That is, does it involve a lot of (or at least some) creativity? Or is it more routine work? I'm sure every deal is different (is it? I don't know) but does your work fall into a certain pattern after a few years in which you would get efficient as you get more experience under your belt or..... do you often have to approach your tasks differently?

(This question is terribly formulated, sorry. This is partly due to the fact that I don't know anything about the life of lawyers)

I guess what I want to ask is, what differentiates a good lawyer from a lawyer who would get fired soon? I mean apart from work ethic. You wrote on previous responses that even associates that don't have a chance at getting partner work their ass off, so I'm assuming work ethic isn't really an issue. Then what?


Hope you can share some wisdom.

I think the "getting it" vs. "not getting it" from a few paragraphs ago is most of it. That and leadership, human dynamics, etc. Shockingly important given how little credit people give it when thinking about the law (at least for corporate, and to be a star in many other areas too).

How long does it take before you can tell if someone "gets it" or not? To that end, if someone isn't "getting it," are they given a chance to fix it or are they normally given the idea that they should leave?

I could probably tell you, with a pretty high degree of accuracy, whether someone has a chance at partner within 1-2 transactions. Even as a first year. Now "chance" doesn't mean "will" - but the people who don't are very clear. They will be given opportunities to fix it. They will not do so, and will eventually leave.

1-2 Transactions? That seems so early, how can you tell that easily?

[Anonymous User]

Did you like law school? Do you like your job better than law school?

[Anonymous User]

Is it possible to lateral from a V20 firm to a V10 after a year or so of corporate work, if you find that you don't like the culture, etc.?

[itbdvorm]

Apologies if this has been covered, but JD/MBA as a "flight risk" or a negative in any way ... any truth to that?

Nah, not really. What's the worst that happens - a smart kid is there for 3 years then goes and becomes a client?

[itbdvorm]

1-2 Transactions? That seems so early, how can you tell that easily?

You'd be surprised - talent really is distinguishible almost immediately.

[itbdvorm]

Did you like law school? Do you like your job better than law school?

I had a pretty good time in law school, though I think the actual classes didn't have that much to do with it. I'd say the same thing about my job.

[roranoa]

It's both routine and not. Sometimes it's "what's market", what do people normally ask for, go look at precedent, do due diligence, etc. Sometimes it's creative, come up with a mechanism to solve issue X, come up with a power-sharing provision, etc. Every practice area has creativity involved as you get more senior. At the junior level, less so.

Thanks for the reply!

As you become more senior, does the work become more challenging in a way that you have to take more risks? I mean, in the case of big business executives, as you gain more responsibility and influence you eventually take on more risks when making major business decision. Is that also the case of corporate lawyers?

[itbdvorm]

Is it possible to lateral from a V20 firm to a V10 after a year or so of corporate work, if you find that you don't like the culture, etc.?

Maybe. Depends on what the "etc." is. Just for "culture" reasons will be pretty tough. Should be a more compelling reason than that (which could include practice areas, etc.).

A year or so is probably not the right timeframe anyway. Unless you're so clearly better than your peers at X (and don't think staying at your firm will give you the right opportunities). But in that case, if you're at a V20 firm, why aren't you staying and trying to make partner?

[itbdvorm]

It's both routine and not. Sometimes it's "what's market", what do people normally ask for, go look at precedent, do due diligence, etc. Sometimes it's creative, come up with a mechanism to solve issue X, come up with a power-sharing provision, etc. Every practice area has creativity involved as you get more senior. At the junior level, less so.

Thanks for the reply!

As you become more senior, does the work become more challenging in a way that you have to take more risks? I mean, in the case of big business executives, as you gain more responsibility and influence you eventually take on more risks when making major business decision. Is that also the case of corporate lawyers?

I don't really think so in terms of "risks". I guess it's a risk if you ask for X or Y on a deal, or suggest to your client that they hold firm on a position (which could blow up in their face). But it's ultimately their call at the end of the day, so....

[Anonymous User]

So if I'm an incoming associate, my bosses will know on Day 1 whether I'm partner material and I can do nothing about it?

I know there might not be any Jeremy Lin stories in BigLaw, where you are just completely unheard of and then magically become partner, but isn't there some way to improve or out-perform what your original ceiling seemed to be?

[Anonymous User]

Do most associates at your firm have good non-work lives? Are they able to keep up personal relationships, interests, health, etc. while still working at your firm? Can people actually schedule a vacation and then take it? How life-destroying are the hours? Are they happy?

[roranoa]

It's both routine and not. Sometimes it's "what's market", what do people normally ask for, go look at precedent, do due diligence, etc. Sometimes it's creative, come up with a mechanism to solve issue X, come up with a power-sharing provision, etc. Every practice area has creativity involved as you get more senior. At the junior level, less so.

Thanks for the reply!

As you become more senior, does the work become more challenging in a way that you have to take more risks? I mean, in the case of big business executives, as you gain more responsibility and influence you eventually take on more risks when making major business decision. Is that also the case of corporate lawyers?

I don't really think so in terms of "risks". I guess it's a risk if you ask for X or Y on a deal, or suggest to your client that they hold firm on a position (which could blow up in their face). But it's ultimately their call at the end of the day, so....

But does the work nevertheless become more challenging or different in anyway as you gain seniority? Do the partners basically do the same kind of work as the senior associates?

[fumagalli]

1-2 Transactions? That seems so early, how can you tell that easily?

You'd be surprised - talent really is distinguishible almost immediately.

Wow, do you think one can gauge their talent before getting into law school? Do you think one's LSAT score would be a good indicator? I would really want to know if I'm up for it or not before I even set foot in the field.