Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

(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.
rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby rad lulz » Thu Sep 12, 2013 12:05 pm

Icculus wrote:
Gorki wrote:Think this thread is good enuff evidence for future 0Ls to stay the hell out of lawl. There are two big groups: jobless students who are insufferably depressing, people with jobs who are oblivious to their lucky position in life and insufferably arrogant. These groupings persist into practice. Buyers beware.


I would point out many people I know with jobs realize how lucky we are. I went into OCI fully aware I could strike out. I started mass mailing in late July/early August before OCI started. I I know plenty of people who struck out who had decent grades/WE/ and were personable. For people here who claim that those without jobs are inferior in some way, fuck you. There is more luck that goes into it than you know. Even outside of law when I applied for jobs in my previous industry I would maybe get one interview for every 50-100 resumes I sent and even I ended up with one job offer that I took. I don't know why it is so hard for people to understand how hiring works. A lot of it, the majority, is stuff totally outside the applicants control.

This. I know I've said this a million times, but OCI is not a mathematical function where you input grades, school, and interview ability and out pops a vault range or a number of offers

KidStuddi
Posts: 465
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 12:35 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby KidStuddi » Thu Sep 12, 2013 12:14 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
KidStuddi wrote:It blows my mind that you think someone canceling their callback or turning down their offer 2 weeks earlier somehow means that the firm will bring in more / different people? Your own experience clearly indicates that if firms don't get enough people they'll continue recruiting well into October. Why then is there is any reason to rush other people's decisions if the firm will simply keep recruiting regardless?

Bottom line, take your time and explore all options thoroughly. Ruling out a firm before you've even attended a callback is baffling to me, unless you're doing it for geographic reasons.


I just got an offer for a market-paying firm and cancelled a CB at a firm that pays below market. I also would not accept an offer at the latter firm if I were to get one.

Not that I can change things now, but that justifies canceling a CB, amirite?

I realize OP didn't write his post in the most tactful way, but I do kinda see where s/he's coming from. Why sit on 5+ offers for multiple weeks?


Okay, sure, reasonable. I wouldn't (and didn't) rule out firms based on salary, but I realize I'm probably in the minority of law students on that point. I turned down an above market paying offer to goto a market paying firm because while the callback at the above market firm was with a of peppy, loving-life looking associates, when I went back to the firm after receiving an offer and got to meet with people in the practice group I was interested in, the office atmosphere was depressing and the people looked haggard as fuck. If I had canceled my other callbacks the second I got the "most prestigious" or the "best paying" offer, I would have ended up at a firm I would have hated. Hell, if I had stopped going on callbacks at that point I might not even have known that not all BigLaw offices are depressing as fuck.

I'm not advocating sitting on 5+ offers for multiple weeks, I'm advocating taking the search seriously and relying on your own experiences rather than on Vault/Chambers rankings and salary information. You don't know what your options are until you explore them. At the risk of humble bragging, the firm I ended up going to was my I think my 12th callback and probably my 10th or 11th offer. I declined offers as they came in, but at no point did I stop going on callbacks because I thought I knew enough to rule out firms sight unseen.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273151
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Sep 12, 2013 12:31 pm

KidStuddi wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Firms estimate their yields, and they are frequently wrong. Canceling callbacks will often result in people being brought in. I have first hand experience with V50 and V100 firms telling me this when they tried to bring me in for callbacks in mid October.

Bottom line, take your time but don't collect offers. It always blows my mind when people do this.


It blows my mind that you think someone canceling their callback or turning down their offer 2 weeks earlier somehow means that the firm will bring in more / different people? Your own experience clearly indicates that if firms don't get enough people they'll continue recruiting well into October. Why then is there is any reason to rush other people's decisions if the firm will simply keep recruiting regardless?

Bottom line, take your time and explore all options thoroughly. Ruling out a firm before you've even attended a callback is baffling to me, unless you're doing it for geographic reasons.


No one is saying take the first offer you have. Take the time to consider your options but actually try to do that. I'm speaking about the dumb threads on here like DPW vs Hogan DC vs Schulte vs WSGR vs Kasowitz vs Duane Morris. These people need to do everyone a favor and figure out what the hell they want in life; that is a service to both them and their classmates.

Also, I know people that are just trying to collect offers; they are insufferable and not well-liked, but this occurs.

User avatar
hephaestus
Posts: 2385
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:21 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby hephaestus » Thu Sep 12, 2013 12:37 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
KidStuddi wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Firms estimate their yields, and they are frequently wrong. Canceling callbacks will often result in people being brought in. I have first hand experience with V50 and V100 firms telling me this when they tried to bring me in for callbacks in mid October.

Bottom line, take your time but don't collect offers. It always blows my mind when people do this.


It blows my mind that you think someone canceling their callback or turning down their offer 2 weeks earlier somehow means that the firm will bring in more / different people? Your own experience clearly indicates that if firms don't get enough people they'll continue recruiting well into October. Why then is there is any reason to rush other people's decisions if the firm will simply keep recruiting regardless?

Bottom line, take your time and explore all options thoroughly. Ruling out a firm before you've even attended a callback is baffling to me, unless you're doing it for geographic reasons.


No one is saying take the first offer you have. Take the time to consider your options but actually try to do that. I'm speaking about the dumb threads on here like DPW vs Hogan DC vs Schulte vs WSGR vs Kasowitz vs Duane Morris. These people need to do everyone a favor and figure out what the hell they want in life; that is a service to both them and their classmates.

Also, I know people that are just trying to collect offers; they are insufferable and not well-liked, but this occurs.

I guess I should not be surprised that people try to collect offers to validate their self-worth, but that's horrible. Then again, we are talking about law students here.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273151
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Sep 12, 2013 12:41 pm

KidStuddi wrote:Okay, sure, reasonable. I wouldn't (and didn't) rule out firms based on salary, but I realize I'm probably in the minority of law students on that point. I turned down an above market paying offer to goto a market paying firm because while the callback at the above market firm was with a of peppy, loving-life looking associates, when I went back to the firm after receiving an offer and got to meet with people in the practice group I was interested in, the office atmosphere was depressing and the people looked haggard as fuck. If I had canceled my other callbacks the second I got the "most prestigious" or the "best paying" offer, I would have ended up at a firm I would have hated. Hell, if I had stopped going on callbacks at that point I might not even have known that not all BigLaw offices are depressing as fuck.

I'm not advocating sitting on 5+ offers for multiple weeks, I'm advocating taking the search seriously and relying on your own experiences rather than on Vault/Chambers rankings and salary information. You don't know what your options are until you explore them. At the risk of humble bragging, the firm I ended up going to was my I think my 12th callback and probably my 10th or 11th offer. I declined offers as they came in, but at no point did I stop going on callbacks because I thought I knew enough to rule out firms sight unseen.

Dude, I don't think anyone is telling people in your situation to cancel CBs/offers. The OP specifically says if you happen to know you aren't entertaining the idea of working for them. There are actually people at my school who have said essentially "I would never work for X firm, but I'm gonna go on the CB so I can see my friend in the city for free." Maybe they've "earned" it (and honestly, I think people like that seeing a message like this wouldn't give a crap anyway).

KidStuddi
Posts: 465
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 12:35 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby KidStuddi » Thu Sep 12, 2013 12:46 pm

Icculus wrote:
Gorki wrote:Think this thread is good enuff evidence for future 0Ls to stay the hell out of lawl. There are two big groups: jobless students who are insufferably depressing, people with jobs who are oblivious to their lucky position in life and insufferably arrogant. These groupings persist into practice. Buyers beware.


I would point out many people I know with jobs realize how lucky we are. I went into OCI fully aware I could strike out. I started mass mailing in late July/early August before OCI started. I I know plenty of people who struck out who had decent grades/WE/ and were personable. For people here who claim that those without jobs are inferior in some way, fuck you. There is more luck that goes into it than you know. Even outside of law when I applied for jobs in my previous industry I would maybe get one interview for every 50-100 resumes I sent and even I ended up with one job offer that I took. I don't know why it is so hard for people to understand how hiring works. A lot of it, the majority, is stuff totally outside the applicants control.


You're going too far with this. It's not "luck" that you were smart enough to start mass mailing in July. It's not luck that you got your grades, or went to the school you went to, or worked where you worked before law school. Yes, you can't control what a firm is looking for, but you can damn well try to have as much universal appeal as possible, and you can damn sure put yourself in a position to be seen by as many potential employers as possible.

I understand where you're coming from in that, on the margins, your fate may be determined by random chance. But seriously, fuck anyone who tries to tell me that I got the job I worked my entire life for because of "luck." Those 16 hour days in libraries getting ready for finals weren't luck. The neuroticism that drove me to do a mass mailing campaign before OCI even started wasn't luck. The hours of prep I did before every interview wasn't luck. It was work. And work is what got the vast majority of us to BigLaw. Saying it was out of our control is hopelessly fatalist, and just plain wrong.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273151
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Sep 12, 2013 12:52 pm

Went to a V10 offer dinner last night and was told point blank by a partner that the firm makes the offers it wants to make and does not change anything based on their yield. I understand this doesn't necessarily apply to all or even most firms, but I think at the upper end (or whatever you want to call it), you aren't screwing anyone over by waiting till the 28 days are up to turn down an offer.

User avatar
Icculus
Posts: 1421
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:02 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Icculus » Thu Sep 12, 2013 12:55 pm

KidStuddi wrote:
Icculus wrote:
Gorki wrote:Think this thread is good enuff evidence for future 0Ls to stay the hell out of lawl. There are two big groups: jobless students who are insufferably depressing, people with jobs who are oblivious to their lucky position in life and insufferably arrogant. These groupings persist into practice. Buyers beware.


I would point out many people I know with jobs realize how lucky we are. I went into OCI fully aware I could strike out. I started mass mailing in late July/early August before OCI started. I I know plenty of people who struck out who had decent grades/WE/ and were personable. For people here who claim that those without jobs are inferior in some way, fuck you. There is more luck that goes into it than you know. Even outside of law when I applied for jobs in my previous industry I would maybe get one interview for every 50-100 resumes I sent and even I ended up with one job offer that I took. I don't know why it is so hard for people to understand how hiring works. A lot of it, the majority, is stuff totally outside the applicants control.


You're going too far with this. It's not "luck" that you were smart enough to start mass mailing in July. It's not luck that you got your grades, or went to the school you went to, or worked where you worked before law school. Yes, you can't control what a firm is looking for, but you can damn well try to have as much universal appeal as possible, and you can damn sure put yourself in a position to be seen by as many potential employers as possible.

I understand where you're coming from in that, on the margins, your fate may be determined by random chance. But seriously, fuck anyone who tries to tell me that I got the job I worked my entire life for because of "luck." Those 16 hour days in libraries getting ready for finals weren't luck. The mass mailing campaign wasn't luck. The hours of prep I did before every interview wasn't luck. It was work. And work is what got the vast majority of us to BigLaw. Saying it was out of our control is hopelessly fatalist, and just plain wrong.


I'm not saying you didn't work hard, but I bet most people who strike out work just as hard as you did. While I know a few people who slacked off during 1L, the vast majority worked their asses off, mass mailed, prepped for interviews, etc. I think there is a mistake people make in assuming people with no offers just "didn't want it enough" or "didn't work hard enough" when the vast majority of students are all working hard (or smart) and prepping and trying to put themselves in the best position to succeed. But when there are twice as many grads as jobs, never mind the small number of big law jobs, a lot of hard working, smart, well prepared students are going to end up screwed.

ETA: yes, you can do things that help put you in a better position (mass mailing, choosing a larger market, networking) but that doesn't guarantee anything. I think you misunderstand me when I say I think I am lucky. I mean I think I am lucky because the work I put in paid off, not that I had nothing to do with it. My point is merely plenty of people worked as hard or harder than I did and struck out.
Last edited by Icculus on Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3139
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:03 pm

Sure, people should not hoard offers they don't intend to accept, though I don't think that's really very common.

But people with no offers need to focus on things they can control instead of getting pissy at people having more success. Some guy declining his offer is going to increase your odds infinitesimally if at all. It's not his fault you don't have an offer. (It's probably not your fault, either. It's just a shitty economy.)

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18407
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby bk1 » Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:30 pm

KidStuddi wrote:You're going too far with this. It's not "luck" that you were smart enough to start mass mailing in July. It's not luck that you got your grades, or went to the school you went to, or worked where you worked before law school. Yes, you can't control what a firm is looking for, but you can damn well try to have as much universal appeal as possible, and you can damn sure put yourself in a position to be seen by as many potential employers as possible.

I understand where you're coming from in that, on the margins, your fate may be determined by random chance. But seriously, fuck anyone who tries to tell me that I got the job I worked my entire life for because of "luck." Those 16 hour days in libraries getting ready for finals weren't luck. The neuroticism that drove me to do a mass mailing campaign before OCI even started wasn't luck. The hours of prep I did before every interview wasn't luck. It was work. And work is what got the vast majority of us to BigLaw. Saying it was out of our control is hopelessly fatalist, and just plain wrong.

+1 to Icculus.

I think the sooner people adopt a "but for the grace of god go I" attitude the better. I do not doubt that your effort got you biglaw, but for every person whose effort got them biglaw there are countless others who tried just as hard, if not harder, and struck out or got no offered. Maybe they just weren't smart enough (couldn't get into a good enough law school or get good enough law grades in spite of hard work), maybe they just weren't personable enough (tried really hard to get a job but they were just too awkward in their interviews in spite of trying to fix that), but the reality is that maybe they really were just unlucky (you can't tell me that 1/3 of Winston's 2012 SA class or that people who had the misfortune of summering right after the financial crisis hit and so many of them got no offered just didn't work hard enough ), etc, etc. People should appreciate the fact that they could easily end up screwed even though they put in a lot of work and did everything they could right.

That said, that really isn't pertinent to this thread. As I've said in a similar thread, people who hoard offers for the sake of hoarding offers are dicks. But people who chastise them out of self interest really aren't any better (and may in fact be worse since effort chastising your peers could have been spent more productively actually hunting for a job).

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby IAFG » Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:32 pm

I feel lucky as fuck to have the job I have. I don't know who could feel entitled to it.

User avatar
TatteredDignity
Posts: 1520
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 2:06 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby TatteredDignity » Thu Sep 12, 2013 2:07 pm

KidStuddi wrote:
You're going too far with this. It's not "luck" that you were smart enough to start mass mailing in July. It's not luck that you got your grades, or went to the school you went to, or worked where you worked before law school. Yes, you can't control what a firm is looking for, but you can damn well try to have as much universal appeal as possible, and you can damn sure put yourself in a position to be seen by as many potential employers as possible.

I understand where you're coming from in that, on the margins, your fate may be determined by random chance. But seriously, fuck anyone who tries to tell me that I got the job I worked my entire life for because of "luck." Those 16 hour days in libraries getting ready for finals weren't luck. The neuroticism that drove me to do a mass mailing campaign before OCI even started wasn't luck. The hours of prep I did before every interview wasn't luck. It was work. And work is what got the vast majority of us to BigLaw. Saying it was out of our control is hopelessly fatalist, and just plain wrong.


Hard work is neither necessary (though for most people it is) nor sufficient to success. HTH

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby rad lulz » Thu Sep 12, 2013 2:45 pm

IAFG wrote:I feel lucky as fuck to have the job I have. I don't know who could feel entitled to it.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22813
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Thu Sep 12, 2013 5:32 pm

What Icculus and bk said.

horsehockey
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2012 12:38 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby horsehockey » Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:39 pm

I'm not saying you didn't work hard, but I bet most people who strike out work just as hard as you did. While I know a few people who slacked off during 1L, the vast majority worked their asses off, mass mailed, prepped for interviews, etc. I think there is a mistake people make in assuming people with no offers just "didn't want it enough" or "didn't work hard enough" when the vast majority of students are all working hard (or smart) and prepping and trying to put themselves in the best position to succeed. But when there are twice as many grads as jobs, never mind the small number of big law jobs, a lot of hard working, smart, well prepared students are going to end up screwed.

ETA: yes, you can do things that help put you in a better position (mass mailing, choosing a larger market, networking) but that doesn't guarantee anything. I think you misunderstand me when I say I think I am lucky. I mean I think I am lucky because the work I put in paid off, not that I had nothing to do with it. My point is merely plenty of people worked as hard or harder than I did and struck out.[/quote]

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Good man, or woman, or whatever you are. Humility is what this world needs right now.. As you've said, there are lots of good, smart, hard working law students out there just trying to break through...start their careers. And they're butting up against fate. The economy still sucks, as it has for your predecessors in 2009, 10 and 11. This is a very tough market for you and for your prospective employers. Be kind to those who've worked hard and have, so far, struck out. This too,shall pass.

User avatar
OneMoreLawHopeful
Posts: 1191
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:21 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby OneMoreLawHopeful » Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:55 pm

IAFG wrote:I feel lucky as fuck to have the job I have. I don't know who could feel entitled to it.


I think this is a false dichotomy that is the cause of all the problems here.

bk1 et al seem to be of the opinion that anyone who claims they got a job because of "hard work" is simply "entitled."

Yet this is crap. If anything the viewpoint that is more indicative of entitlement goes something like "But I did everything right and ended up unemployed..."

Are there elements of the job search that are beyond the applicants control? Of course there are - the students who accepted summer positions at Dewey and LeBoeuf did so months before there was any outward indication the firm was falling apart (the major partner defections didn't come until January, well after OCI).

But at the same time, the major elements of the job search are either within the applicants control, or a product of the applicant's aptitude. These include where you go to law school (because you can always just not go!), what grades you get when you're there (the variance in the GPA curve is always much larger than it would be if grades were actually "random"), how you come off in an interview (we've all met charismatic people, and we've all met awkward people), and what you do in your spare time (habitat for humanity v. Call of Duty).

It's absolutely ridiculous to claim, as Icculus did, that the MAJORITY of the reason you get a job is "luck." Unless you are counting innate intelligence, charisma, and drive as "luck," in which case MAYBE it's majority luck, but that's a separate argument.

What we're actually unwilling to talk about is the very real possibility that some people, even at HYS, likely are missing something required to get a job, and they are not getting adequate feedback to that effect. I've personally been to mock-interview workshops where someone clearly came off like a serial killer, and yet the mock-interviewer didn't have the heart to tell them; this seems to especially be the case the more hopeless the interviewee seems to come off.

Likewise, imagine the kind of feedback problem inherent in lawschool grading at a place like Stanford. 70% of each class gets a P, and no one ever gets failed. So a student at Stanford could be turning in absolutely crap work, quarter after quarter, and getting a P. A classmate of that student could also be getting straight Ps, but is turning in median work every quarter. Both work hard, but because the feedback is a joke, the one whose work has actually been crap all along gets blind-sided by a no offer as a summer associate - but because the work was legitimately crap, and had been the whole time, the no-offer was actually earned. Since almost half the T14 uses some kind of non-standard grading, this could happen to students at a whole slew of top schools.

But we don't ever talk about this. We don't acknowledge that there really are people who cannot interview if their lives depended upon it. We don't acknowledge that people can have a great undergrad GPA, and a great LSAT score, and ALSO have absolutely no ability when it comes to legal reasoning. But anyone who's gone to law school knows otherwise - they've seen the poor interviewer, or the guy who literally got a PhD in physics, but cannot distinguish a case to save his life.

We don't talk about this, and it's skewing the viewpoint about what really goes on - we're calling each other "entitled" because it's easier than dealing with the whole story.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22813
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:58 pm

Those people might exist, but that doesn't mean there aren't plenty of people who do everything right and strike out.

You want to think the system is more logical and rational than it actually is.

User avatar
OneMoreLawHopeful
Posts: 1191
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:21 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby OneMoreLawHopeful » Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:01 pm

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Those people might exist, but that doesn't mean there aren't plenty of people who do everything right and strike out.

You want to think the system is more logical and rational than it actually is.


But you're making an argument from ignorance - stating that it's majority luck does not actually make it so.

Put differently - if it's all luck, why is the "Choosing a lawschool" forum full of posts that say "T14 OR RETAKE!"? Because it's not actually all luck.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18407
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby bk1 » Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:11 pm

OneMoreLawHopeful wrote:bk1 et al seem to be of the opinion that anyone who claims they got a job because of "hard work" is simply "entitled."

Wait what? When did I ever say that someone is entitled?

At T14s you are talking mostly about people with A- undergrad GPAs and 99th percentile LSAT scores. Are you really trying to tell me that these people, even the ones who end up towards the bottom of the law school curve, are incapable of doing the simplistic work that is assigned to summer associates? More to the heart of your argument, Icculus may have been a bit hyperbolic in saying that it is a majority luck, but the truth is that there is a lot more randomness than people want to admit. For example, the difference between having 1 more offer versus 1 less offer generally isn't that huge and that difference can often be chalked up to randomness (the difference between 3 offers and 4, or 4 offers and 5, is unlikely to make a material difference). But here's the thing, there's an astronomical difference between 0 offers and 1 offer because that's the difference between starting in biglaw and being shut out of it forever. That randomness can afflict many people. The people with 1 offer (of which there are many) could just as easily had no offers. Many of the people with no offers (of which there are infinitely more) could just as easily have had 1 offer.

Or, as Nony put it:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:You want to think the system is more logical and rational than it actually is.

And nowhere in this post did she say it is a majority luck, nor is anybody saying that it is all luck.

User avatar
OneMoreLawHopeful
Posts: 1191
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:21 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby OneMoreLawHopeful » Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:26 pm

bk1 wrote:Wait what? When did I ever say that someone is entitled?

In the thread originally entitled "the anti-vale"

bk1 wrote:At T14s you are talking mostly about people with A- undergrad GPAs and 99th percentile LSAT scores. Are you really trying to tell me that these people, even the ones who end up towards the bottom of the law school curve, are incapable of doing the simplistic work that is assigned to summer associates?

Neither undergrad nor the LSAT teaches you how to tell the difference between a case that a court will likely analogize to and one that is totally inapposite (or the similar skill of distinguishing unfavorable precedent). Believe it or not, this is actually a problem for some people, regardless of their undergrad GPAs and LSAT scores. But an inability to do this will cause you to turn in absolutely crap memos and research assignments as a summer associate. Speaking with biglaw associates and partners, the story about the Harvard student who turned in a memo about an at best "tangentially related" Supreme Court case, but missed multiple on-point cases in the same district, is not uncommon.

bk1 wrote:More to the heart of your argument, Icculus may have been a bit hyperbolic in saying that it is a majority luck, but the truth is that there is a lot more randomness than people want to admit. For example, the difference between having 1 more offer versus 1 less offer generally isn't that huge and that difference can often be chalked up to randomness (the difference between 3 offers and 4, or 4 offers and 5, is unlikely to make a material difference). But here's the thing, there's an astronomical difference between 0 offers and 1 offer because that's the difference between starting in biglaw and being shut out of it forever. That randomness can afflict many people. The people with 1 offer (of which there are many) could just as easily had no offers. Many of the people with no offers (of which there are infinitely more) could just as easily have had 1 offer.

But this analysis ignores the other half of the equation. You are correct in that many people with 0 offers may have had 1 offer if their luck had gone differently. But many were also never going to have an offer no matter how "lucky" they got. It's entirely possible that the number of people who were never going to have an offer vastly outnumber those who "but for luck" would have had an offer. I would suggest this is even likely if the pool we're counting includes law students at places like Cooley.

bk1 wrote:Or, as Nony put it:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:You want to think the system is more logical and rational than it actually is.

This isn't a real argument. I can just reply that you just want to think the system is less logical and rational than it actually is, and we get nowhere.

bk1 wrote:And nowhere in this post did she say it is a majority luck, nor is anybody saying that it is all luck.

Icculus did (which is who I attributed it to), and you can see this just a few posts above:
Icculus wrote:I would point out many people I know with jobs realize how lucky we are. I went into OCI fully aware I could strike out. I started mass mailing in late July/early August before OCI started. I I know plenty of people who struck out who had decent grades/WE/ and were personable. For people here who claim that those without jobs are inferior in some way, fuck you. There is more luck that goes into it than you know. Even outside of law when I applied for jobs in my previous industry I would maybe get one interview for every 50-100 resumes I sent and even I ended up with one job offer that I took. I don't know why it is so hard for people to understand how hiring works. A lot of it, the majority, is stuff totally outside the applicants control.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18407
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby bk1 » Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:38 pm

OneMoreLawHopeful wrote:But this analysis ignores the other half of the equation. You are correct in that many people with 0 offers may have had 1 offer if their luck had gone differently. But many were also never going to have an offer no matter how "lucky" they got. It's entirely possible that the number of people who were never going to have an offer vastly outnumber those who "but for luck" would have had an offer. I would suggest this is even likely if the pool we're counting includes law students at places like Cooley.

I don't disagree that the people who would never have gotten anything aren't numerous, but that's not the side of the equation that we are talking about. What the rest of us are saying is that, for those many people that easily could have missed the biglaw boat but didn't (which you agree in the bolded are many), it behooves them to realize how luck played a factor into their job search results and how easily things could have gone differently.

User avatar
OneMoreLawHopeful
Posts: 1191
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:21 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby OneMoreLawHopeful » Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:42 pm

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Tell me how any of those things were within my control or have anything to do with how hardworking I am or what school I chose to attend or what grades I got.


Right off the bat I would point out that even you seem to attribute your success to what happened during interviews (both with the judge and the subsequent job). You are clearly a conscientious interviewer, and likely even a talented one. Being charismatic is a skill that some people have naturally, some can develop, and some simply never can. But like any other skill, it's not randomness - you have cultivated it or you haven't. You stated you didn't have "top grades" but I suspect you weren't below median either, so again we see non-randomness.

But your question is also irrelevant; this discussion also isn't about any one particular job. Which firm gives you an offer is probably majority luck in most cases. Whether or not you get an offer at all is a very different story. Someone with above median grades, who is a charismatic interviewer, will probably get some kind of a job coming out of most law schools.

User avatar
Icculus
Posts: 1421
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:02 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Icculus » Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:48 pm

OneMoreLawHopeful wrote:
bk1 wrote:Wait what? When did I ever say that someone is entitled?

In the thread originally entitled "the anti-vale"

bk1 wrote:At T14s you are talking mostly about people with A- undergrad GPAs and 99th percentile LSAT scores. Are you really trying to tell me that these people, even the ones who end up towards the bottom of the law school curve, are incapable of doing the simplistic work that is assigned to summer associates?

Neither undergrad nor the LSAT teaches you how to tell the difference between a case that a court will likely analogize to and one that is totally inapposite (or the similar skill of distinguishing unfavorable precedent). Believe it or not, this is actually a problem for some people, regardless of their undergrad GPAs and LSAT scores. But an inability to do this will cause you to turn in absolutely crap memos and research assignments as a summer associate. Speaking with biglaw associates and partners, the story about the Harvard student who turned in a memo about an at best "tangentially related" Supreme Court case, but missed multiple on-point cases in the same district, is not uncommon.

bk1 wrote:More to the heart of your argument, Icculus may have been a bit hyperbolic in saying that it is a majority luck, but the truth is that there is a lot more randomness than people want to admit. For example, the difference between having 1 more offer versus 1 less offer generally isn't that huge and that difference can often be chalked up to randomness (the difference between 3 offers and 4, or 4 offers and 5, is unlikely to make a material difference). But here's the thing, there's an astronomical difference between 0 offers and 1 offer because that's the difference between starting in biglaw and being shut out of it forever. That randomness can afflict many people. The people with 1 offer (of which there are many) could just as easily had no offers. Many of the people with no offers (of which there are infinitely more) could just as easily have had 1 offer.

But this analysis ignores the other half of the equation. You are correct in that many people with 0 offers may have had 1 offer if their luck had gone differently. But many were also never going to have an offer no matter how "lucky" they got. It's entirely possible that the number of people who were never going to have an offer vastly outnumber those who "but for luck" would have had an offer. I would suggest this is even likely if the pool we're counting includes law students at places like Cooley.

bk1 wrote:Or, as Nony put it:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:You want to think the system is more logical and rational than it actually is.

This isn't a real argument. I can just reply that you just want to think the system is less logical and rational than it actually is, and we get nowhere.

bk1 wrote:And nowhere in this post did she say it is a majority luck, nor is anybody saying that it is all luck.

Icculus did (which is who I attributed it to), and you can see this just a few posts above:
Icculus wrote:I would point out many people I know with jobs realize how lucky we are. I went into OCI fully aware I could strike out. I started mass mailing in late July/early August before OCI started. I I know plenty of people who struck out who had decent grades/WE/ and were personable. For people here who claim that those without jobs are inferior in some way, fuck you. There is more luck that goes into it than you know. Even outside of law when I applied for jobs in my previous industry I would maybe get one interview for every 50-100 resumes I sent and even I ended up with one job offer that I took. I don't know why it is so hard for people to understand how hiring works. A lot of it, the majority, is stuff totally outside the applicants control.


I may have been a bit hyperbolic, my point mainly being in any job search there are many more forces beyond your control at work and that people who get jobs often fail to realize that these outside forces have such a large impact. And outside OCI I maintain that these forces are as great as what you can control. You need to find a place hiring, have the qualifications, beat other qualified people into the interview, interview well, fill a need, and win over the hiring committee.

User avatar
OneMoreLawHopeful
Posts: 1191
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:21 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby OneMoreLawHopeful » Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:54 pm

bk1 wrote:
OneMoreLawHopeful wrote:But this analysis ignores the other half of the equation. You are correct in that many people with 0 offers may have had 1 offer if their luck had gone differently. But many were also never going to have an offer no matter how "lucky" they got. It's entirely possible that the number of people who were never going to have an offer vastly outnumber those who "but for luck" would have had an offer. I would suggest this is even likely if the pool we're counting includes law students at places like Cooley.

I don't disagree that the people who would never have gotten anything aren't numerous, but that's not the side of the equation that we are talking about. What the rest of us are saying is that, for those many people that easily could have missed the biglaw boat but didn't (which you agree in the bolded are many), it behooves them to realize how luck played a factor into their job search results and how easily things could have gone differently.


I disagree. For luck to even enter into the calculus the person first had to be a strong enough candidate to put them within the "but for luck" range of an offer. Since the overwhelming majority of unemployed law students were never within that range, it's incorrect to say the strength of the candidate's application was not the determining factor.

Look at it this way:
Assume that all law students can be given a competence score somewhere between 1 and 100. Anyone with a competence score >70 is going to get biglaw. Because of "luck" your actual competence score can get bumped up or down 5 points, for whatever reason. This REALLY matters if you have a score in the 66-75 range. But if the majority of law students (again counting ALL schools) are scoring somewhere in the 50s, then someone who got an offer, even if they were at 66 without luck, really is more talented/hardworking than most of the others. Telling them "You only got an offer because of luck!" is silly because most people weren't even at 66 to begin with.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18407
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby bk1 » Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:01 pm

Again, nobody is saying "only." We are saying that it does have an effect and that that effect can have a large impact on outcomes (i.e. the difference between 1 offer and 0 offers) even if the effect of luck compared to people's actual "skills" is minimal. People who end up with good outcomes should be appreciative of that fact, not reveling how much better they are than the vast majority of law students, because but for a small bit of luck their outcomes could have been just as bad as people who are far less "skilled" than they are.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.