CSO - Just How Full of BS Are They?

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: CSO - Just How Full of BS Are They?

Postby timbs4339 » Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:20 am

delusional wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:Adding bodies to the CSO is a way for schools to pretend to be doing something about the lack of jobs. It's also a correlation-causation problem. Harvard has a large CSO. Harvard students get good jobs. Therefore, if you want your students to get good jobs, charge Harvard prices and give them a Harvard-size CSO.

Also there is really no way the schools can "market" their students because the firms don't care about how students are marketed. They care about a general prestige ranking that correlates with LSAT/GPA, which is evident from USNWR, and location.

This assumes the conclusion. It's true that a CSO advertising its students next to hot models or clever slogans won't work, but that's not the only way to market students. And while it's true that they care about prestige, schools could still work on the margins. Getting five more students jobs by persuading your alumni in hiring to be more vocal than peer schools' alumni would be a plausible goal. Use the CSO budget to host alumni events, and instead of asking for money, ask for this. While it might not change the school's numbers immediately, it would help five students. It might happen already, but this board has heard nothing of such practices.


That's not "marketing." That's just asking alumni for help and could be done through the alumni office or the Dean's office. Marketing would say "X Law School students take courses with Y professors, have Z clinics and externships! We provide a world class, rigorous legal education. Hire us!" Employers don't care about that crap.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22805
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: CSO - Just How Full of BS Are They?

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:28 am

delusional wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:Adding bodies to the CSO is a way for schools to pretend to be doing something about the lack of jobs. It's also a correlation-causation problem. Harvard has a large CSO. Harvard students get good jobs. Therefore, if you want your students to get good jobs, charge Harvard prices and give them a Harvard-size CSO.

Also there is really no way the schools can "market" their students because the firms don't care about how students are marketed. They care about a general prestige ranking that correlates with LSAT/GPA, which is evident from USNWR, and location.

This assumes the conclusion. It's true that a CSO advertising its students next to hot models or clever slogans won't work, but that's not the only way to market students. And while it's true that they care about prestige, schools could still work on the margins. Getting five more students jobs by persuading your alumni in hiring to be more vocal than peer schools' alumni would be a plausible goal. Use the CSO budget to host alumni events, and instead of asking for money, ask for this. While it might not change the school's numbers immediately, it would help five students. It might happen already, but this board has heard nothing of such practices.

How would you know about these practices? I mean, my school holds alumni events frequently, and I have no idea what the CSOs are doing during those events, or how/when they're talking to alumni.

delusional
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 7:57 pm

Re: CSO - Just How Full of BS Are They?

Postby delusional » Tue Apr 09, 2013 2:13 pm

timbs4339 wrote:
delusional wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:Adding bodies to the CSO is a way for schools to pretend to be doing something about the lack of jobs. It's also a correlation-causation problem. Harvard has a large CSO. Harvard students get good jobs. Therefore, if you want your students to get good jobs, charge Harvard prices and give them a Harvard-size CSO.

Also there is really no way the schools can "market" their students because the firms don't care about how students are marketed. They care about a general prestige ranking that correlates with LSAT/GPA, which is evident from USNWR, and location.

This assumes the conclusion. It's true that a CSO advertising its students next to hot models or clever slogans won't work, but that's not the only way to market students. And while it's true that they care about prestige, schools could still work on the margins. Getting five more students jobs by persuading your alumni in hiring to be more vocal than peer schools' alumni would be a plausible goal. Use the CSO budget to host alumni events, and instead of asking for money, ask for this. While it might not change the school's numbers immediately, it would help five students. It might happen already, but this board has heard nothing of such practices.


That's not "marketing." That's just asking alumni for help and could be done through the alumni office or the Dean's office. Marketing would say "X Law School students take courses with Y professors, have Z clinics and externships! We provide a world class, rigorous legal education. Hire us!" Employers don't care about that crap.
Potato, potahto.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.