Columbia Law School EIP 2013

(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.
Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Aug 25, 2013 10:05 pm

Anonymous User wrote:This is an interesting take, however, I think it's been much harder to get a CB than you make it sound. I am far from a nut job, quite a good interviewer, Stone, didn't commit any of the faux pas you mentioned. I got 2 CBs out of 17 interviews and some resume drops, and waiting to see if either one turns into an offer. Just saying.


Your problem might be the bolded. Instead of changing what has been going wrong, you keep thinking you're above-average at interviewing and keep getting lackluster results. Change things up before it gets worse!

I have friends with similar grades as you with a lot more CBs who aren't amazing interviewees either. They've worked a lot at their interviewing because they realized they weren't that great before the process.

I highly suggest you do the same before doing any more interviews.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Aug 25, 2013 10:35 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:This is an interesting take, however, I think it's been much harder to get a CB than you make it sound. I am far from a nut job, quite a good interviewer, Stone, didn't commit any of the faux pas you mentioned. I got 2 CBs out of 17 interviews and some resume drops, and waiting to see if either one turns into an offer. Just saying.


Your problem might be the bolded. Instead of changing what has been going wrong, you keep thinking you're above-average at interviewing and keep getting lackluster results. Change things up before it gets worse!

I have friends with similar grades as you with a lot more CBs who aren't amazing interviewees either. They've worked a lot at their interviewing because they realized they weren't that great before the process.

I highly suggest you do the same before doing any more interviews.

You're very presumptuous. I have worked a lot at it, actually.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Aug 25, 2013 10:43 pm

Anonymous User wrote:You're very presumptuous. I have worked a lot at it, actually.


Do you see why I'm saying you can't call yourself "quite a good" interviewee with those results? Again, my friends with no work experience with similar grades have had significantly better results.

Regardless, it's good you're working a lot at it. Best of luck. I really hope one of the 2 CBs works out for you!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Aug 25, 2013 11:27 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I am a CLS alum, a midlevel at a top firm. I just spent much of the past couple of weeks doing CBs. I figured I would share my impressions, since BiTD someone did that on a thread like this and it was helpful to me. Recognize y'all are mostly done, but hope this helps.

1) If other firms are like mine, they will try to match you with at least some CLS folks. The CLS folks you interview with, especially the younger ones, WANT to give you a good rating. So just don't f*ck it up.

2) Most of you are not good interviewers. I wasn't either.

3) So since most of you aren't going to win a charisma contest (we are all, in the end, folks who decided to go to law school), and your interviewer probably isn't super charismatic, either, get it out of your head that you're going to dazzle folks. Don't monologue. For the love of god, don't have obviously scripted answers. Is kiss of death.*

*that being said, if your résumé begs an obvious question, I assume you have a prepared response and if it seems like you don't, I'll take off a (metaphorical) point. But the art of it is in delivering a canned answer without seeming scripted. Is not easy. But is necessary.

4) Speaking personally, I make a judgement within about 2 minutes as to whether you are a nut job. I view identifying the crazies as my main job. I then want to test your common sense - are you "professional" - meaning, are your answers uncontroversial and conservative? Again, don't wow me, just show the ability to shoot shit smoothly. That takes another 5-10 min or so. After that, Ive made my call and I'm more worried about recruiting you - the tables are turned.

5) you'd be stunned how many people are incompetent at the aspects of being an associate other than the brains. People flake out, or can't be trusted, or play games. I don't really care if I like you, and I don't really care if I can be up in your business at 3AM, because frankly, if we're working at 3AM, you will be in your office and me in mine. What I want to answer is - if its Friday at 9PM and shit comes in, and I email you, will you pretend to not hear your BB? Will you hope the other first year on the email answers first, and sandbag the response? Will you do a crappy job to get it off your plate so you can go to frying pan on Saturday? If the answer to any of those is yes, that's a real bad thing - and frankly, for most people the answer is yes. Most sane people, anyways. But to be a good associate you need to be more than a little crazy, and at least at the interview, if you can't at least reasonably convince me that you have that craziness in you, you've failed to show common sense and failed #4 above.

6) if I think you want to clock 3 years, pay off your debt and bail, that's not a good thing. If I see lots of social justice type stuff on your resume, or lots of pro bono, that's something i am going to press you on. pro bono/social justice is not inherently a negative point, and some of the lawyers i respect the most at my firm are big on it, but you have to be very careful to build a narrative as someone enthusiastic about "core" biglaw work.

7) if you tell me you are seriously considering an inferior firm because of culture or fit, I will ding you because you are an idiot. For saying it, and for thinking it. I generally won't ask about that, but some partners will. Some interviewees volunteer it, which is insanity. Happened to me twice last week.

Good luck all. May everyone find a landing spot that is best for them.


Other T6 student who is struggling dropping in here. I am the type of person you describe (or so I like to think) -- sane but hard-working, and I'm friendly but I do not BS or pass the buck. However, it seems that people who it would be terrible to work with (and I know, from forced group work) are the ones raking in the callbacks and offers. Difference? Them = white guy, me = asian female. Honestly, do the stereotypes of 'quiet' asian women affect your thinking at all? in the sense that they might have to overcompensate by being extra loud or something? Because I'm starting to think that 'good interviewing' means tall and loud.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Aug 25, 2013 11:43 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Other T6 student who is struggling dropping in here. I am the type of person you describe (or so I like to think) -- sane but hard-working, and I'm friendly but I do not BS or pass the buck. However, it seems that people who it would be terrible to work with (and I know, from forced group work) are the ones raking in the callbacks and offers. Difference? Them = white guy, me = asian female. Honestly, do the stereotypes of 'quiet' asian women affect your thinking at all? in the sense that they might have to overcompensate by being extra loud or something? Because I'm starting to think that 'good interviewing' means tall and loud.


In a process as arbitrary and time-constrained as EIP interviews, I think it'd be denial of the greatest degree to assume that all sorts of biases don't come into play.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Aug 25, 2013 11:44 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Other T6 student who is struggling dropping in here. I am the type of person you describe (or so I like to think) -- sane but hard-working, and I'm friendly but I do not BS or pass the buck. However, it seems that people who it would be terrible to work with (and I know, from forced group work) are the ones raking in the callbacks and offers. Difference? Them = white guy, me = asian female. Honestly, do the stereotypes of 'quiet' asian women affect your thinking at all? in the sense that they might have to overcompensate by being extra loud or something? Because I'm starting to think that 'good interviewing' means tall and loud.

+1

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 12:44 am

Anonymous User wrote:
7) if you tell me you are seriously considering an inferior firm because of culture or fit, I will ding you because you are an idiot. For saying it, and for thinking it. I generally won't ask about that, but some partners will. Some interviewees volunteer it, which is insanity. Happened to me twice last week.



I've done this to multiple V10s and have gotten callbacks at all of them. "I might not be able to work at Wachtell because I frankly am not sure that I will be happiest billing the level of hours reputed to be common at the firm." I hope the soulless search for prestige and exit options is going well for you.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 1:26 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:This is an interesting take, however, I think it's been much harder to get a CB than you make it sound. I am far from a nut job, quite a good interviewer, Stone, didn't commit any of the faux pas you mentioned. I got 2 CBs out of 17 interviews and some resume drops, and waiting to see if either one turns into an offer. Just saying.


Your problem might be the bolded. Instead of changing what has been going wrong, you keep thinking you're above-average at interviewing and keep getting lackluster results. Change things up before it gets worse!

I have friends with similar grades as you with a lot more CBs who aren't amazing interviewees either. They've worked a lot at their interviewing because they realized they weren't that great before the process.

I highly suggest you do the same before doing any more interviews.

You're very presumptuous. I have worked a lot at it, actually.

Im non-Stone with 16 callbacks. Received 5 offers from first 5 callbacks and cancelled the rest. Not bragging (this is anonymous, after all), just saying that EIP is a tremendous opportunity to interview with damn near as many employers as you want so if you fuck it up, it's on you. I am proof that interviewing skills matters. Spin yourself. Weave a narrative.

I know a lot of people with only 1-4 CBs who claim to be good interviewers but are, in fact, quite awkward or pretentious or some other adjective that they are entirely unaware of. Maybe you should have some frank and open conversations with friends about how you may be perceived while in an interview room. For example, I know that I have a tendency to speak off-the-cuff and far too openly and I become vulnerable to stupid comments. Another friend of mine is a great schmoozer, but when he speaks he uses 10 letter words when a 3 letter word would do, so he comes off pedantic. Everyone has their weakness, find yours and protect against it. Because if you are stone and didnt receive 9+ callbacks, you underperformed based on my anecdotal evidence of 10+ friends with whom I am familiar. Also... why did you only have 17 screeners? Again, tremendous opportunity to interview with a seemingly endless list of employers.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 1:29 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Other T6 student who is struggling dropping in here. I am the type of person you describe (or so I like to think) -- sane but hard-working, and I'm friendly but I do not BS or pass the buck. However, it seems that people who it would be terrible to work with (and I know, from forced group work) are the ones raking in the callbacks and offers. Difference? Them = white guy, me = asian female. Honestly, do the stereotypes of 'quiet' asian women affect your thinking at all? in the sense that they might have to overcompensate by being extra loud or something? Because I'm starting to think that 'good interviewing' means tall and loud.

+1

Same anon as above. I am personally familiar of a quiet, small, shy (though not asian) woman who is low Stone but no LR who received 21(+/-1) callbacks from 25 (+/-1) screeners! While I do not doubt that stereotypes are used in the evaluation process, I feel like "quiet asian woman" is not particularly negative. Best of luck to you!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 2:01 am

Anonymous User wrote:Same anon as above. I am personally familiar of a quiet, small, shy (though not asian) woman who is low Stone but no LR who received 21(+/-1) callbacks from 25 (+/-1) screeners! While I do not doubt that stereotypes are used in the evaluation process, I feel like "quiet asian woman" is not particularly negative. Best of luck to you!


Wtf is this racist bullshit.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 2:56 am

Although I think the anecdotes can be helpful, they're just that. In situations like this we're always walking a thin line between constructive criticism and attacking each other. We should try to guide the discussion toward the former and avoid the latter.

To people who did well, congratulations! I'm very glad you did well and hope you end up at a firm that you love. That said, you should note that, just by the numbers, not everyone is going to get 21 callbacks. Even if people were better interviewers, there would likely be cuts made and not everyone could swing a fantastic callback rate.

To those who didn't have as much success interviewing, I can empathize. I knew going in that I would not be a phenomenal interviewer and I didn't receive callbacks from several firms I was excited about. But, you can't slip into defeatism and give up. You also don't want to start lashing out at others when they try to give feedback or suggestions. Obviously there is a skill to interviewing and some are better at it than others. Try to hone your abilities and push forward until you get an offer.

Contrary to what some here are posting, I also believe that you can totally get unlucky. Some people will have interests that are easier to talk about. Some interviewers will connect with you because of something super specific and if it had been another interviewer you wouldn't have had that connection. Some people might end up with interviewers who are misogynistic/homophobes/racist/whatever. I honestly think I would have fared far worse if not for connecting on some very specific things with a couple of my interviewers. The line between pretentious and intelligent or between confident and brash can be thin and depends largely on the person who ends up interviewing you.

Let's get some perspective back on things: going into law school, I'm sure some folks here had clear ideas as to what type of firm they would work at and the way they would like their professional lives to unfold, but none (or near it) of us could say with any real certainty what type of firm we'd be working at or if we'd get a biglaw job at all. I hope that folks without offers are continuing to hustle and I really hope you find something. For those who received on offer but are disappointed with the result, it's easy to slip into the "I could have worked at a V5 firm!" or "I could have worked at Warpe, Wistfull, Kubitschek and McMingus! I really loved their culture!" or myriad other thoughts but I guarantee that there's someone else with those very offers stuck on the hedonic treadmill thinking about the opportunity that narrowly escaped them. I hope that everyone with an offer can learn to love the offers they have.

Finally, one thing that strikes me as really really awful about this process is the sick bloodsport we entered into. At times I feel like we've slipped into "The Lottery" or something: we recognize that some people aren't going to get jobs and those of us who end up happily on the other side smile through the process, comfortable with it continuing on another year despite its brutal nature. I honestly don't want to normalize the interviewing process that we have. It's frustrating to think that people are struggling to find jobs. I'd much rather end up feeling concern for them and general disgust with the legal hiring system than end up feeling cocksure in my abilities because I happened to make it through the process (largely) unscathed.

This was a long post. Sorry. I'm looking forward to seeing you all in JG again soon. On my end, I'm done with the interview process and hopefully will stop neurotically checking this thread.

Best wishes to you all,

-Ted "Theodore" Logan

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 8:44 am

Any Paul Hastings news post super cb days tues/thurs last week?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 10:25 am

I will say that the risk of cultural mismatch is something my firm is hyperaware of, and implores interviewers to be hyperaware of. There's a concerted effort to match up recruits with interviewers with whom there is a background/personal connection so that you avoid good-ol-boy-itis. That said, it could play a role if I think your personality is a particularly poor fit for the job - FWIW, I think that being an assertive person is an advantage, so if you show an outgoing personality, that's a positive. That's not to say I don't run across super successful introverts every day at the office, it's just harderf or them and requires more work and development of other skills to compensate. Most of the folks I work with who are "naturally" introverted or quiet have learned to be very persuasive and outgoing when needed.

Anonymous User wrote:Other T6 student who is struggling dropping in here. I am the type of person you describe (or so I like to think) -- sane but hard-working, and I'm friendly but I do not BS or pass the buck. However, it seems that people who it would be terrible to work with (and I know, from forced group work) are the ones raking in the callbacks and offers. Difference? Them = white guy, me = asian female. Honestly, do the stereotypes of 'quiet' asian women affect your thinking at all? in the sense that they might have to overcompensate by being extra loud or something? Because I'm starting to think that 'good interviewing' means tall and loud.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 10:32 am

I have a friend who just finished a long string of clerkships. Despite having a glittering resume, he was having a terrible time finding a firm job. He swore he was a good interviewer. I arranged for a colleague to mock interview him and give feedback. Turned out that, simply, he sucked at interviewing and didn't realize it.

After some professional interview coaching, he has a great job that is worthy of his credentials. You should consider getting professional coaching - it's a worthy investment if you're consistently punching below your credentials/grades in interview outcomes. More likely than not, your interviewing is holding you back. You would not BELIEVE how many people come through here who are mediocre or worse in interviews - I presume most of them have no idea that they need help. I don't think career services at CLS, at least when I was there, did nearly enough to coach folks - I was lucky enough to have a cousin who was a headhunter and I worked with him prior to EIP and callbacks, and it was invaluable.

Anonymous User wrote:You're very presumptuous. I have worked a lot at it, actually.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 10:48 am

Anonymous User wrote:I have a friend who just finished a long string of clerkships. Despite having a glittering resume, he was having a terrible time finding a firm job. He swore he was a good interviewer. I arranged for a colleague to mock interview him and give feedback. Turned out that, simply, he sucked at interviewing and didn't realize it.

After some professional interview coaching, he has a great job that is worthy of his credentials. You should consider getting professional coaching - it's a worthy investment if you're consistently punching below your credentials/grades in interview outcomes. More likely than not, your interviewing is holding you back. You would not BELIEVE how many people come through here who are mediocre or worse in interviews - I presume most of them have no idea that they need help. I don't think career services at CLS, at least when I was there, did nearly enough to coach folks - I was lucky enough to have a cousin who was a headhunter and I worked with him prior to EIP and callbacks, and it was invaluable.

Anonymous User wrote:You're very presumptuous. I have worked a lot at it, actually.

OP here. Trust me, I have no illusions about how good an interviewer I am. I came into EIP hating interviews and knowing I am mediocre at it. I got some outside help prior and then gave it my best try, and I really surprised myself when I did so well. I am not deluded, I really did do well. I chalk up my results to bad luck more than anything. If so many people at CLS are bad interviewers, why would I not get more CBs? There is no trend to be found in the two CBs I did get. The firms are polar opposites in their culture. One interviewer was a litigator, one transactional. One was my very first interview, the other was my 12th. One was male, one was female. I didn't do any better or make any more of a connection in those screeners than the 15 others. It is what it is and there's nothing I can do now, but my point is EIP does not always lead to the expected outcome. Luck plays a role, as people above have said.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 10:54 am

Anonymous User wrote:I have a friend who just finished a long string of clerkships. Despite having a glittering resume, he was having a terrible time finding a firm job. He swore he was a good interviewer. I arranged for a colleague to mock interview him and give feedback. Turned out that, simply, he sucked at interviewing and didn't realize it.

After some professional interview coaching, he has a great job that is worthy of his credentials. You should consider getting professional coaching - it's a worthy investment if you're consistently punching below your credentials/grades in interview outcomes. More likely than not, your interviewing is holding you back. You would not BELIEVE how many people come through here who are mediocre or worse in interviews - I presume most of them have no idea that they need help. I don't think career services at CLS, at least when I was there, did nearly enough to coach folks - I was lucky enough to have a cousin who was a headhunter and I worked with him prior to EIP and callbacks, and it was invaluable.

Anonymous User wrote:You're very presumptuous. I have worked a lot at it, actually.


For those of us with more interviews/CBs coming up, would you be willing to share some of the most helpful advice you received? What were some of the main problems (with you or your friend) and what did you do to fix those problems?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 11:38 am

Anonymous User wrote:For those of us with more interviews/CBs coming up, would you be willing to share some of the most helpful advice you received? What were some of the main problems (with you or your friend) and what did you do to fix those problems?



It's very resume dependent. The big picture advice is: identify the areas on your resume that interviewers are likely to focus on, and have an idea of how you are going to respond without seeming scripted. I had a very unconventional career prior to law, and folks always asked about it - and asked over, and over, often filling up much of the interview. For 1L summer (back then, people interviewed and got 1L jobs all the time), I struck out. My cousin pointed out, and I'm quoting here, "every second you spend talking about your old job is a second you don't spend explaining why you're going to be a great lawyer", and his solution to those questions was to answer politely but curtly and to change the subject. It worked like a charm - EIP and CBs were a breeze.

That's not the kind of thing that's evident if you're just preparing yourself. Interviewing is more than just not picking your nose and sitting slightly forward in the chair; you're building a narrative of "I'm enthusiastic about this job, and I'll do good work."

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 12:28 pm

Hope you all had great weekends and enjoyed the beautiful weather.

Has anyone scheduled a return visit to a firm? If so, how did you do it? Specifically, did you get in touch with one of your interviewers or just call recruiting?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 1:10 pm

Any idea what the general turnaround for STB callback--> offer is?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 1:16 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Any idea what the general turnaround for STB callback--> offer is?


+1. Had a Cb on Friday. Wondering at what point I should move on

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 1:44 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:For those of us with more interviews/CBs coming up, would you be willing to share some of the most helpful advice you received? What were some of the main problems (with you or your friend) and what did you do to fix those problems?



It's very resume dependent. The big picture advice is: identify the areas on your resume that interviewers are likely to focus on, and have an idea of how you are going to respond without seeming scripted. I had a very unconventional career prior to law, and folks always asked about it - and asked over, and over, often filling up much of the interview. For 1L summer (back then, people interviewed and got 1L jobs all the time), I struck out. My cousin pointed out, and I'm quoting here, "every second you spend talking about your old job is a second you don't spend explaining why you're going to be a great lawyer", and his solution to those questions was to answer politely but curtly and to change the subject. It worked like a charm - EIP and CBs were a breeze.

That's not the kind of thing that's evident if you're just preparing yourself. Interviewing is more than just not picking your nose and sitting slightly forward in the chair; you're building a narrative of "I'm enthusiastic about this job, and I'll do good work."


I've also gotten advice that if interviewers focus on something that they find interesting on your resume, then to just go with it to show that you're not some legal automaton, especially at the CB stage because they're supposedly looking more for fit.

So if an interviewer starts enthusiastically asking me about my time as, say, a skydiving teacher, should I change the subject so I can talk about my summer legal work experience or something?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 1:56 pm

Any offers from Chadbourne or Katten yet?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 1:56 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
I've also gotten advice that if interviewers focus on something that they find interesting on your resume, then to just go with it to show that you're not some legal automaton, especially at the CB stage because they're supposedly looking more for fit.

So if an interviewer starts enthusiastically asking me about my time as, say, a skydiving teacher, should I change the subject so I can talk about my summer legal work experience or something?



Generally, if someone has something super interesting on their resume, I'll use it as an icebreaker or a segue, but its not fair to the candidate to have a 15 minute discussion about their experience in the peace corps in Mongolia when they're being interviewed for a legal job. So if a reviewer is taking you on a exegesis on the merits of your masters dissertation, you need to take back control of the interview, in a subtle and unnoticeable way. I was taught to handle that with a gentle segue back to law - "Something great about skydiving is that it teaches you this intense attention to detail, because, you know, it's your butt on the line, which I think has really helped me in law school and will help me as a lawyer, speaking of which . . ." That's just a POOMA segue, and maybe not a good one, but I had 2 or 3 of those ready if I got asked about my prior career.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 2:00 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Hope you all had great weekends and enjoyed the beautiful weather.

Has anyone scheduled a return visit to a firm? If so, how did you do it? Specifically, did you get in touch with one of your interviewers or just call recruiting?


I scheduled a couple for this week and contacted recruiting directly. It's set up largely like an interview in that you have a schedule and may or may not go to lunch.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273179
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law School EIP 2013

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 26, 2013 4:09 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Other T6 student who is struggling dropping in here. I am the type of person you describe (or so I like to think) -- sane but hard-working, and I'm friendly but I do not BS or pass the buck. However, it seems that people who it would be terrible to work with (and I know, from forced group work) are the ones raking in the callbacks and offers. Difference? Them = white guy, me = asian female. Honestly, do the stereotypes of 'quiet' asian women affect your thinking at all? in the sense that they might have to overcompensate by being extra loud or something? Because I'm starting to think that 'good interviewing' means tall and loud.


Just to chime in --- the people who are struggling all seem to point to some external factor (bad luck, Asian, quiet, whatever). Here's the thing: EIP is a closed system. There are 400 CLS students (or, with transfers, maybe more like 800) interviewing with firms. Interviewers get a certain number of callbacks to give to the people they interview. The math is pretty simple. If you didn't get a callback, the interviewer thought too many people were better than you. Maybe its your grades, maybe its your resume, maybe its your interview, or maybe it does have something to do with luck (the interviewer was in a shitty mood right before you went in). In the end, luck isn't the difference between getting 10 CBs and getting 2. There are also plenty of quiet, introverted people who are successful in big law.

If I were struggling, I'd think about what I could do differently, not the impact of stereotypes / luck.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.