What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

(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: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jul 17, 2018 4:52 pm

I go to a school that is 100% pre-select with separate OCI's for different markets. I sent about 45 applications across two separate OCI's and got 30 pre-selects (mostly in NY, a few in DC, and a few scattered across other secondary markets where I have ties). I feel really disappointed by this, but people keep telling me that this is a good yield. What kind of yield is considered "good" for pre-selects?

gregfootball2001

Bronze
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:35 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby gregfootball2001 » Tue Jul 17, 2018 4:57 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I go to a school that is 100% pre-select with separate OCI's for different markets. I sent about 45 applications across two separate OCI's and got 30 pre-selects (mostly in NY, a few in DC, and a few scattered across other secondary markets where I have ties). I feel really disappointed by this, but people keep telling me that this is a good yield. What kind of yield is considered "good" for pre-selects?

Let me ask you something. Will learning that some people consider your yield "good" help you in your upcoming interviews? Will those interviews go differently if people consider your yield to be "bad"? You've been selected by a bunch of places, now go do research and kick ass. To someone, your yield is amazing, to another, just average, and to yet another, horrible. None of it matters. Go get a job.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jul 17, 2018 5:07 pm

gregfootball2001 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I go to a school that is 100% pre-select with separate OCI's for different markets. I sent about 45 applications across two separate OCI's and got 30 pre-selects (mostly in NY, a few in DC, and a few scattered across other secondary markets where I have ties). I feel really disappointed by this, but people keep telling me that this is a good yield. What kind of yield is considered "good" for pre-selects?

Let me ask you something. Will learning that some people consider your yield "good" help you in your upcoming interviews? Will those interviews go differently if people consider your yield to be "bad"? You've been selected by a bunch of places, now go do research and kick ass. To someone, your yield is amazing, to another, just average, and to yet another, horrible. None of it matters. Go get a job.


OP here - that's a good point, hadn't thought of it that way. I guess that just like all law students I want to know where I stand. In my friend group at least, yield rates have been anywhere from 100% to some people only getting 2-3 out of 50+ apps

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jul 17, 2018 5:47 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I want to know where I stand.


Who cares? Go get a job you're happy with. If you get 0 offers, who cares that you had more screeners than someone in your class who gets a great offer? Is that going to make you feel any better come October?

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jul 17, 2018 5:53 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
gregfootball2001 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I go to a school that is 100% pre-select with separate OCI's for different markets. I sent about 45 applications across two separate OCI's and got 30 pre-selects (mostly in NY, a few in DC, and a few scattered across other secondary markets where I have ties). I feel really disappointed by this, but people keep telling me that this is a good yield. What kind of yield is considered "good" for pre-selects?

Let me ask you something. Will learning that some people consider your yield "good" help you in your upcoming interviews? Will those interviews go differently if people consider your yield to be "bad"? You've been selected by a bunch of places, now go do research and kick ass. To someone, your yield is amazing, to another, just average, and to yet another, horrible. None of it matters. Go get a job.


OP here - that's a good point, hadn't thought of it that way. I guess that just like all law students I want to know where I stand. In my friend group at least, yield rates have been anywhere from 100% to some people only getting 2-3 out of 50+ apps

I agree with all the above. It’s also going to be super contingent on the school you go to and its OCI options and the markets and the like. As someone who went to a pre-select school, that looks like a great yield to me. But there isn’t really anything about a high yield that means anything - you still have to interview well. There can be some people with tons of pre-selects who will bomb, and people with few pre-selects who may get callbacks from all of them because they do so well once they get in the door. A high yield gives you more chances, admittedly, but it doesn’t guarantee anything.

gregfootball2001

Bronze
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:35 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby gregfootball2001 » Tue Jul 17, 2018 6:27 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
gregfootball2001 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I go to a school that is 100% pre-select with separate OCI's for different markets. I sent about 45 applications across two separate OCI's and got 30 pre-selects (mostly in NY, a few in DC, and a few scattered across other secondary markets where I have ties). I feel really disappointed by this, but people keep telling me that this is a good yield. What kind of yield is considered "good" for pre-selects?

Let me ask you something. Will learning that some people consider your yield "good" help you in your upcoming interviews? Will those interviews go differently if people consider your yield to be "bad"? You've been selected by a bunch of places, now go do research and kick ass. To someone, your yield is amazing, to another, just average, and to yet another, horrible. None of it matters. Go get a job.


OP here - that's a good point, hadn't thought of it that way. I guess that just like all law students I want to know where I stand. In my friend group at least, yield rates have been anywhere from 100% to some people only getting 2-3 out of 50+ apps

And that's exactly my point. The 100% person will think that you were a little low, and the 2-3 person will think you did amazingly well. There's no benchmark.

Further, realize that pre-selects can be excruciatingly random. For all you know it was an admin making the choices. Don't dwell on it, just go do as well as you can. And keep mass mailing!

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jul 17, 2018 6:40 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I go to a school that is 100% pre-select with separate OCI's for different markets. I sent about 45 applications across two separate OCI's and got 30 pre-selects (mostly in NY, a few in DC, and a few scattered across other secondary markets where I have ties). I feel really disappointed by this, but people keep telling me that this is a good yield. What kind of yield is considered "good" for pre-selects?


Why are you very disappointed that you got 2 of every 3 interviews you applied for?

Wolverine32

New
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 8:20 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Wolverine32 » Wed Jul 18, 2018 7:49 am

To ask the obvious question...why in the hell would you want more than 30 screener interviews? I’d keep this whole thing to yourself, b/c this type of bizarre behavior is not something law firms look for.

RaceJudicata

Gold
Posts: 1710
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2015 2:51 pm

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby RaceJudicata » Wed Jul 18, 2018 9:42 am

Wolverine32 wrote:To ask the obvious question...why in the hell would you want more than 30 screener interviews? I’d keep this whole thing to yourself, b/c this type of bizarre behavior is not something law firms look for.


Ya if you don’t convert any of your 30 screeners , that’s on you. I don’t think an additional 15 interviews would improve your chances. And report back after you have completed 30 screeners, I promise you won’t want to do any more.

gasfard

New
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2017 2:02 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby gasfard » Wed Jul 18, 2018 9:56 am

It's a really good yield and I don't blame you for wanting more. Especially, if you're not a good interviewer, you'll find yourself improving as you do more interviews. I myself had lots of screeners, but got the bulk of my callbacks during the latter half of OCI because I improved my interviewing skills as I went through OCI. But it'll be very tiring, especially if your OCI only spans three days.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 18, 2018 9:58 am

gasfard wrote:It's a really good yield and I don't blame you for wanting more. Especially, if you're not a good interviewer, you'll find yourself improving as you do more interviews. I myself had lots of screeners, but got the bulk of my callbacks during the latter half of OCI because I improved my interviewing skills as I went through OCI. But it'll be very tiring, especially if your OCI only spans three days.


OP here - that's good to know. I wouldn't call myself a "bad" interviewer but I'm a more introverted person, which I've been told can come across as low-energy. And for what it's worth, the 30 screeners are over the course of a week (I go to a T25 that has multiple OCI programs in multiple cities).

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:15 am

RaceJudicata wrote:
Wolverine32 wrote:To ask the obvious question...why in the hell would you want more than 30 screener interviews? I’d keep this whole thing to yourself, b/c this type of bizarre behavior is not something law firms look for.


Ya if you don’t convert any of your 30 screeners , that’s on you. I don’t think an additional 15 interviews would improve your chances. And report back after you have completed 30 screeners, I promise you won’t want to do any more.


Let's not go making OP unnecessarily confident. It's DEFINITELY possible not to convert 30 screeners into an offer. Pre-select can be a bit weird. It's usually at schools that don't have super robust OCIs that can support a lottery system, and a lot of times firms will just interview (more or less) the top X people in the class who applied. If your class rank is right around X then you're probably going to get quite a few screeners, but it can be difficult to convert those to calbacks because (a)you're at an inherent disadvantage because you're starting off at more or less the bottom of the stack in every interview and (b) firms probably aren't going to call back nearly the percentage of people as they would at a T13 OCI...for instance someone came to my school's OCI to callback one person . Now, I'm not saying this is the case for OP, but don't just tell him to assume that he's good because 30 screeners.

Anecdotally, I only got 3 callbacks and 0 offers with ~50 screeners the first time around when my rank was right around the cut-off line (I'm fairly confident of that because a significant portion of my interviews were alternates), then got into a joint degree program and did OCI again with significantly better grades the following year and got ~15 callbacks and multiple offers. Being right at the cut line can lead to a tough OCI. It's easy to get down on yourself because you had so many chances, and there are a lot of people with the attitude (similar to several in this thread) that if you don't get something from a lot of screeners, it means there's something wrong with you.

OP, do not get complacent. It's mid-July. Now is a prime time to start mass-mailing law firms and making a concerted effort to drum up extra interviews. While you shouldn't be disappointed with getting 30 of 45 screeners, you still should not assume you'll get a job from OCI either.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 18, 2018 12:51 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
RaceJudicata wrote:
Wolverine32 wrote:To ask the obvious question...why in the hell would you want more than 30 screener interviews? I’d keep this whole thing to yourself, b/c this type of bizarre behavior is not something law firms look for.


Ya if you don’t convert any of your 30 screeners , that’s on you. I don’t think an additional 15 interviews would improve your chances. And report back after you have completed 30 screeners, I promise you won’t want to do any more.


Let's not go making OP unnecessarily confident. It's DEFINITELY possible not to convert 30 screeners into an offer. Pre-select can be a bit weird. It's usually at schools that don't have super robust OCIs that can support a lottery system, and a lot of times firms will just interview (more or less) the top X people in the class who applied. If your class rank is right around X then you're probably going to get quite a few screeners, but it can be difficult to convert those to calbacks because (a)you're at an inherent disadvantage because you're starting off at more or less the bottom of the stack in every interview and (b) firms probably aren't going to call back nearly the percentage of people as they would at a T13 OCI...for instance someone came to my school's OCI to callback one person . Now, I'm not saying this is the case for OP, but don't just tell him to assume that he's good because 30 screeners.

Anecdotally, I only got 3 callbacks and 0 offers with ~50 screeners the first time around when my rank was right around the cut-off line (I'm fairly confident of that because a significant portion of my interviews were alternates), then got into a joint degree program and did OCI again with significantly better grades the following year and got ~15 callbacks and multiple offers. Being right at the cut line can lead to a tough OCI. It's easy to get down on yourself because you had so many chances, and there are a lot of people with the attitude (similar to several in this thread) that if you don't get something from a lot of screeners, it means there's something wrong with you.

OP, do not get complacent. It's mid-July. Now is a prime time to start mass-mailing law firms and making a concerted effort to drum up extra interviews. While you shouldn't be disappointed with getting 30 of 45 screeners, you still should not assume you'll get a job from OCI either.


Former recruiter here. Yes grades matter, but mostly to get past the screener hurdle. After that, it's anyone's game. If someone's a K-JD with a shit personality and a 4.0, someone with a 3.5, work experience, and a good personality can easily beat that person out. Once a person meets all of the basic requirements (including grades) there are two big questions left: 1) can I put this person in front of a client and not worry about that person screwing things up; and 2) is this the kind of person that I would want to stay in the office with at 3:00am when we've got a tight deadline? When I'm looking to answer that question, the fact that the person got a B+ on their Torts exam means nothing to me.

As far as more callbacks from T-14 schools: yeah, that's true, simply because we go to more T-14 schools than non-T14 schools. But that doesn't mean we don't take T1 candidates seriously. I've interviewed some phenomenal candidates from T1 schools, many who had no issue getting into T14 schools but chose the T1 for money/location/whatever, and there were a lot of times that I was vouching for the T1 candidate over the mediocre HYS candidate. Being at a T1 hurts you only to the extent that you'll have fewer firms looking to recruit directly at your school, and if you want NY/DC biglaw, you'll have to hustle more to get in front of an interviewer.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:08 pm

I was fortunate, 1L SA. My friends were constantly shuffling back and forth to screeners. Having 30 interviews was not uncommon. For some the yield was one offer, others had multiple offers. To me, the take away was, more is better.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:22 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
RaceJudicata wrote:
Wolverine32 wrote:To ask the obvious question...why in the hell would you want more than 30 screener interviews? I’d keep this whole thing to yourself, b/c this type of bizarre behavior is not something law firms look for.


Ya if you don’t convert any of your 30 screeners , that’s on you. I don’t think an additional 15 interviews would improve your chances. And report back after you have completed 30 screeners, I promise you won’t want to do any more.


Let's not go making OP unnecessarily confident. It's DEFINITELY possible not to convert 30 screeners into an offer. Pre-select can be a bit weird. It's usually at schools that don't have super robust OCIs that can support a lottery system, and a lot of times firms will just interview (more or less) the top X people in the class who applied. If your class rank is right around X then you're probably going to get quite a few screeners, but it can be difficult to convert those to calbacks because (a)you're at an inherent disadvantage because you're starting off at more or less the bottom of the stack in every interview and (b) firms probably aren't going to call back nearly the percentage of people as they would at a T13 OCI...for instance someone came to my school's OCI to callback one person . Now, I'm not saying this is the case for OP, but don't just tell him to assume that he's good because 30 screeners.

Anecdotally, I only got 3 callbacks and 0 offers with ~50 screeners the first time around when my rank was right around the cut-off line (I'm fairly confident of that because a significant portion of my interviews were alternates), then got into a joint degree program and did OCI again with significantly better grades the following year and got ~15 callbacks and multiple offers. Being right at the cut line can lead to a tough OCI. It's easy to get down on yourself because you had so many chances, and there are a lot of people with the attitude (similar to several in this thread) that if you don't get something from a lot of screeners, it means there's something wrong with you.

OP, do not get complacent. It's mid-July. Now is a prime time to start mass-mailing law firms and making a concerted effort to drum up extra interviews. While you shouldn't be disappointed with getting 30 of 45 screeners, you still should not assume you'll get a job from OCI either.


Former recruiter here. Yes grades matter, but mostly to get past the screener hurdle. After that, it's anyone's game. If someone's a K-JD with a shit personality and a 4.0, someone with a 3.5, work experience, and a good personality can easily beat that person out. Once a person meets all of the basic requirements (including grades) there are two big questions left: 1) can I put this person in front of a client and not worry about that person screwing things up; and 2) is this the kind of person that I would want to stay in the office with at 3:00am when we've got a tight deadline? When I'm looking to answer that question, the fact that the person got a B+ on their Torts exam means nothing to me.

As far as more callbacks from T-14 schools: yeah, that's true, simply because we go to more T-14 schools than non-T14 schools. But that doesn't mean we don't take T1 candidates seriously. I've interviewed some phenomenal candidates from T1 schools, many who had no issue getting into T14 schools but chose the T1 for money/location/whatever, and there were a lot of times that I was vouching for the T1 candidate over the mediocre HYS candidate. Being at a T1 hurts you only to the extent that you'll have fewer firms looking to recruit directly at your school, and if you want NY/DC biglaw, you'll have to hustle more to get in front of an interviewer.


No the OP here, but for those who are at T1 schools and have gotten a good amount of screeners, is it fair to say that getting past the screener hurdle puts them in with a legitimate chance of getting an offer/callback?

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:28 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
RaceJudicata wrote:
Wolverine32 wrote:To ask the obvious question...why in the hell would you want more than 30 screener interviews? I’d keep this whole thing to yourself, b/c this type of bizarre behavior is not something law firms look for.


Ya if you don’t convert any of your 30 screeners , that’s on you. I don’t think an additional 15 interviews would improve your chances. And report back after you have completed 30 screeners, I promise you won’t want to do any more.


Let's not go making OP unnecessarily confident. It's DEFINITELY possible not to convert 30 screeners into an offer. Pre-select can be a bit weird. It's usually at schools that don't have super robust OCIs that can support a lottery system, and a lot of times firms will just interview (more or less) the top X people in the class who applied. If your class rank is right around X then you're probably going to get quite a few screeners, but it can be difficult to convert those to calbacks because (a)you're at an inherent disadvantage because you're starting off at more or less the bottom of the stack in every interview and (b) firms probably aren't going to call back nearly the percentage of people as they would at a T13 OCI...for instance someone came to my school's OCI to callback one person . Now, I'm not saying this is the case for OP, but don't just tell him to assume that he's good because 30 screeners.

Anecdotally, I only got 3 callbacks and 0 offers with ~50 screeners the first time around when my rank was right around the cut-off line (I'm fairly confident of that because a significant portion of my interviews were alternates), then got into a joint degree program and did OCI again with significantly better grades the following year and got ~15 callbacks and multiple offers. Being right at the cut line can lead to a tough OCI. It's easy to get down on yourself because you had so many chances, and there are a lot of people with the attitude (similar to several in this thread) that if you don't get something from a lot of screeners, it means there's something wrong with you.

OP, do not get complacent. It's mid-July. Now is a prime time to start mass-mailing law firms and making a concerted effort to drum up extra interviews. While you shouldn't be disappointed with getting 30 of 45 screeners, you still should not assume you'll get a job from OCI either.


Former recruiter here. Yes grades matter, but mostly to get past the screener hurdle. After that, it's anyone's game. If someone's a K-JD with a shit personality and a 4.0, someone with a 3.5, work experience, and a good personality can easily beat that person out. Once a person meets all of the basic requirements (including grades) there are two big questions left: 1) can I put this person in front of a client and not worry about that person screwing things up; and 2) is this the kind of person that I would want to stay in the office with at 3:00am when we've got a tight deadline? When I'm looking to answer that question, the fact that the person got a B+ on their Torts exam means nothing to me.

As far as more callbacks from T-14 schools: yeah, that's true, simply because we go to more T-14 schools than non-T14 schools. But that doesn't mean we don't take T1 candidates seriously. I've interviewed some phenomenal candidates from T1 schools, many who had no issue getting into T14 schools but chose the T1 for money/location/whatever, and there were a lot of times that I was vouching for the T1 candidate over the mediocre HYS candidate. Being at a T1 hurts you only to the extent that you'll have fewer firms looking to recruit directly at your school, and if you want NY/DC biglaw, you'll have to hustle more to get in front of an interviewer.


These are things that I think people who work in recruiting love to say but that I don't think actually end up being true in practice. I think you're underestimating the effect of (a) having 20 interviews back-to-back and (b) confirmation bias (i.e.: if you're impressed by someone's resume, you're more likely to be impressed by the person). Sure if someone is a great interview and stood out then they can jump to the head of the pack, but if you have great grades you won't really need to do that in a lot of your interviews. If you've got one or two callbacks and a bunch of people seemed comparably good, you're probably going to tend to give that callback to the one with the better grades. My experience going through OCI with good grades compared to great grades was VASTLY different. I'm sure I was a better interviewer the 2nd time around but not so much better that my callback rate across a pretty significant number of screeners went from ~5% to ~35%.

And eh...I mean sure you take T1 candidates seriously, but I spoke to a number of interviewers who said they were limited to 1 or 2 callbacks at my T1. I doubt that's the case as often at a T13 OCI. I also note that it's very relevant what market the screeners are in. If your school is bringing in a bunch of secondary market firms with smaller summer classes and doesn't feed into NYC as well then it's going to be tougher.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:31 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Former recruiter here. Yes grades matter, but mostly to get past the screener hurdle. After that, it's anyone's game. If someone's a K-JD with a shit personality and a 4.0, someone with a 3.5, work experience, and a good personality can easily beat that person out. Once a person meets all of the basic requirements (including grades) there are two big questions left: 1) can I put this person in front of a client and not worry about that person screwing things up; and 2) is this the kind of person that I would want to stay in the office with at 3:00am when we've got a tight deadline? When I'm looking to answer that question, the fact that the person got a B+ on their Torts exam means nothing to me.

As far as more callbacks from T-14 schools: yeah, that's true, simply because we go to more T-14 schools than non-T14 schools. But that doesn't mean we don't take T1 candidates seriously. I've interviewed some phenomenal candidates from T1 schools, many who had no issue getting into T14 schools but chose the T1 for money/location/whatever, and there were a lot of times that I was vouching for the T1 candidate over the mediocre HYS candidate. Being at a T1 hurts you only to the extent that you'll have fewer firms looking to recruit directly at your school, and if you want NY/DC biglaw, you'll have to hustle more to get in front of an interviewer.


No the OP here, but for those who are at T1 schools and have gotten a good amount of screeners, is it fair to say that getting past the screener hurdle puts them in with a legitimate chance of getting an offer/callback?


Quoted recruiter here - getting a screener (assuming you're at a pre-select school) means we like you on paper, and we're giving you a chance to impress us in person. You still have to do well at the interview (as in, have a good personality, show you've done research about the firm, etc).

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:34 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Quoted recruiter here - getting a screener (assuming you're at a pre-select school) means we like you on paper, and we're giving you a chance to impress us in person. You still have to do well at the interview (as in, have a good personality, show you've done research about the firm, etc).


Does it though? Say you have 25 slots to fill and only really like 20 resumes. Do you still give 25 screeners?

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:45 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Former recruiter here. Yes grades matter, but mostly to get past the screener hurdle. After that, it's anyone's game. If someone's a K-JD with a shit personality and a 4.0, someone with a 3.5, work experience, and a good personality can easily beat that person out. Once a person meets all of the basic requirements (including grades) there are two big questions left: 1) can I put this person in front of a client and not worry about that person screwing things up; and 2) is this the kind of person that I would want to stay in the office with at 3:00am when we've got a tight deadline? When I'm looking to answer that question, the fact that the person got a B+ on their Torts exam means nothing to me.

As far as more callbacks from T-14 schools: yeah, that's true, simply because we go to more T-14 schools than non-T14 schools. But that doesn't mean we don't take T1 candidates seriously. I've interviewed some phenomenal candidates from T1 schools, many who had no issue getting into T14 schools but chose the T1 for money/location/whatever, and there were a lot of times that I was vouching for the T1 candidate over the mediocre HYS candidate. Being at a T1 hurts you only to the extent that you'll have fewer firms looking to recruit directly at your school, and if you want NY/DC biglaw, you'll have to hustle more to get in front of an interviewer.


These are things that I think people who work in recruiting love to say but that I don't think actually end up being true in practice. I think you're underestimating the effect of (a) having 20 interviews back-to-back and (b) confirmation bias (i.e.: if you're impressed by someone's resume, you're more likely to be impressed by the person). Sure if someone is a great interview and stood out then they can jump to the head of the pack, but if you have great grades you won't really need to do that in a lot of your interviews. As long as you do pretty well you'll get a lot of callbacks. If you've got one or two callbacks and a bunch of people seemed comparably good, you're probably going to tend to give that callback to the one with the better grades. My experience going through OCI with good grades compared to great grades was VASTLY different. I'm sure I was a better interviewer the 2nd time around but not so much better that my callback rate across a pretty significant number of screeners went from ~5% to ~35%.


Quoted recruiter here - not someone who works for recruiting, but someone who has done hundreds of screeners and callbacks. While I'm sure your experience going through OCI was difficult, you're making these generalizations only based off of your own personal experience, and perhaps those of your friends. But what you are saying is simply not true, and like many law students, you're placing too much emphasis on grades. Yes, firms often have a minimum GPA threshold that students have to meet in order to be taken seriously. Even if you have a great resume and cover letter, a 3.1 from a T1 isn't going to cut it. But once you've made it past our minimum GPA threshold and been pre-selected, then you have just as much of a chance as the 4.0 candidate who we also pre-selected.

You are overestimating the number of times that two people are otherwise EQUALLY good, with one being a say, 3.5 and the other a 3.7. There are almost ALWAYS other differentiating "soft" factors - sometimes in favor of the 3.5, and other times in favor of the 3.7. The people who are making these hiring decisions are usually "adult" enough to know that grades aren't the best indicator of who will succeed in biglaw and they consider many other factors when making their decision. For example, one thing that students tend to forget about is the hiring needs of the firm. We give callbacks and offers to people who, in addition to being a "yes" for the two questions above, will meet the needs of our various practice groups. For example, if the 3.5 above has a PhD in mechanical engineering and the 3.7 is yet another polisci major, and the firm needs people in IP, then yeah, we're going to go with the PhD.

In your personal situation, maybe your grades improved enough to meet the firm's minimum threshold. Or maybe in that year, you matured and came across as more professional and less insecure about yourself. Or maybe your joint degree made you more marketable to the firm. You'll never know, and it doesn't matter now because you got offers that I hope you're happy with.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 18, 2018 1:48 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Quoted recruiter here - getting a screener (assuming you're at a pre-select school) means we like you on paper, and we're giving you a chance to impress us in person. You still have to do well at the interview (as in, have a good personality, show you've done research about the firm, etc).


Does it though? Say you have 25 slots to fill and only really like 20 resumes. Do you still give 25 screeners?


In a situation like that, we may or may not fill all of our slots. If we really like all 20 resumes that we got, we'll screen everyone. If we only like 10 of those people, then we'll give out screeners to those ten, and maybe have a couple others as alternates. The people conducting screeners aren't fond of wasting their time and they won't interview anyone who they feel would not be seriously considered by the firm.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 18, 2018 2:12 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Former recruiter here. Yes grades matter, but mostly to get past the screener hurdle. After that, it's anyone's game. If someone's a K-JD with a shit personality and a 4.0, someone with a 3.5, work experience, and a good personality can easily beat that person out. Once a person meets all of the basic requirements (including grades) there are two big questions left: 1) can I put this person in front of a client and not worry about that person screwing things up; and 2) is this the kind of person that I would want to stay in the office with at 3:00am when we've got a tight deadline? When I'm looking to answer that question, the fact that the person got a B+ on their Torts exam means nothing to me.

As far as more callbacks from T-14 schools: yeah, that's true, simply because we go to more T-14 schools than non-T14 schools. But that doesn't mean we don't take T1 candidates seriously. I've interviewed some phenomenal candidates from T1 schools, many who had no issue getting into T14 schools but chose the T1 for money/location/whatever, and there were a lot of times that I was vouching for the T1 candidate over the mediocre HYS candidate. Being at a T1 hurts you only to the extent that you'll have fewer firms looking to recruit directly at your school, and if you want NY/DC biglaw, you'll have to hustle more to get in front of an interviewer.


These are things that I think people who work in recruiting love to say but that I don't think actually end up being true in practice. I think you're underestimating the effect of (a) having 20 interviews back-to-back and (b) confirmation bias (i.e.: if you're impressed by someone's resume, you're more likely to be impressed by the person). Sure if someone is a great interview and stood out then they can jump to the head of the pack, but if you have great grades you won't really need to do that in a lot of your interviews. As long as you do pretty well you'll get a lot of callbacks. If you've got one or two callbacks and a bunch of people seemed comparably good, you're probably going to tend to give that callback to the one with the better grades. My experience going through OCI with good grades compared to great grades was VASTLY different. I'm sure I was a better interviewer the 2nd time around but not so much better that my callback rate across a pretty significant number of screeners went from ~5% to ~35%.


Quoted recruiter here - not someone who works for recruiting, but someone who has done hundreds of screeners and callbacks. While I'm sure your experience going through OCI was difficult, you're making these generalizations only based off of your own personal experience, and perhaps those of your friends. But what you are saying is simply not true, and like many law students, you're placing too much emphasis on grades. Yes, firms often have a minimum GPA threshold that students have to meet in order to be taken seriously. Even if you have a great resume and cover letter, a 3.1 from a T1 isn't going to cut it. But once you've made it past our minimum GPA threshold and been pre-selected, then you have just as much of a chance as the 4.0 candidate who we also pre-selected.

You are overestimating the number of times that two people are otherwise EQUALLY good, with one being a say, 3.5 and the other a 3.7. There are almost ALWAYS other differentiating "soft" factors - sometimes in favor of the 3.5, and other times in favor of the 3.7. The people who are making these hiring decisions are usually "adult" enough to know that grades aren't the best indicator of who will succeed in biglaw and they consider many other factors when making their decision. For example, one thing that students tend to forget about is the hiring needs of the firm. We give callbacks and offers to people who, in addition to being a "yes" for the two questions above, will meet the needs of our various practice groups. For example, if the 3.5 above has a PhD in mechanical engineering and the 3.7 is yet another polisci major, and the firm needs people in IP, then yeah, we're going to go with the PhD.

In your personal situation, maybe your grades improved enough to meet the firm's minimum threshold. Or maybe in that year, you matured and came across as more professional and less insecure about yourself. Or maybe your joint degree made you more marketable to the firm. You'll never know, and it doesn't matter now because you got offers that I hope you're happy with.


Thank you so much for this post. I am not quite sure where the pessimism of the other poster is coming from, but these kind of informational posts are incredibly helpful to myself and, I'm sure, other people lurking this thread--so thank you. As a student at a T1 who finished in the top 20%-25% and has been pre-selected by a V3 and V15 firm, this kind of information is exactly what I needed to hear before going into my screeners. It is good to know that I actually have a shot. Thank you again!

Anonymous User
Posts: 325779
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: What is a good screener yield for at a pre-select school?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 18, 2018 2:46 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thank you so much for this post. I am not quite sure where the pessimism of the other poster is coming from, but these kind of informational posts are incredibly helpful to myself and, I'm sure, other people lurking this thread--so thank you. As a student at a T1 who finished in the top 20%-25% and has been pre-selected by a V3 and V15 firm, this kind of information is exactly what I needed to hear before going into my screeners. It is good to know that I actually have a shot. Thank you again!


Not sure pessimism is the right word: my point is that until you have an offer in hand you shouldn't assume that the number of screeners you have is enough and that surely you'll get an offer with that many screeners. Start mass-mailing now and get additional interviews. I just think a lot of people in here have been promulgating kind of a dangerous mentality. Be confident but don't be complacent.

Anonymous User wrote:Quoted recruiter here - not someone who works for recruiting, but someone who has done hundreds of screeners and callbacks. While I'm sure your experience going through OCI was difficult, you're making these generalizations only based off of your own personal experience, and perhaps those of your friends. But what you are saying is simply not true, and like many law students, you're placing too much emphasis on grades. Yes, firms often have a minimum GPA threshold that students have to meet in order to be taken seriously. Even if you have a great resume and cover letter, a 3.1 from a T1 isn't going to cut it. But once you've made it past our minimum GPA threshold and been pre-selected, then you have just as much of a chance as the 4.0 candidate who we also pre-selected.

You are overestimating the number of times that two people are otherwise EQUALLY good, with one being a say, 3.5 and the other a 3.7. There are almost ALWAYS other differentiating "soft" factors - sometimes in favor of the 3.5, and other times in favor of the 3.7. The people who are making these hiring decisions are usually "adult" enough to know that grades aren't the best indicator of who will succeed in biglaw and they consider many other factors when making their decision. For example, one thing that students tend to forget about is the hiring needs of the firm. We give callbacks and offers to people who, in addition to being a "yes" for the two questions above, will meet the needs of our various practice groups. For example, if the 3.5 above has a PhD in mechanical engineering and the 3.7 is yet another polisci major, and the firm needs people in IP, then yeah, we're going to go with the PhD.

In your personal situation, maybe your grades improved enough to meet the firm's minimum threshold. Or maybe in that year, you matured and came across as more professional and less insecure about yourself. Or maybe your joint degree made you more marketable to the firm. You'll never know, and it doesn't matter now because you got offers that I hope you're happy with.


My firm recently had someone come in for a CLE on unconscious biases in hiring. According to some studies they cited, if the interviewer looks at the resume prior to the interview, the correlation between liking the resume and liking the candidate is in the 90% range. If the interviewer instead looks at it after the interview, the odds that they like both the candidate and the resume are more like 50/50. Partners tended to rate people the highest when the partner talked more in the interview...and partners tended to talk more when they liked the candidate more going in. A lot of these things are just self-fulfilling prophecies / unconscious prejudgments. Just because after the fact you come up with justifications for why you made a hiring decision based on "fit" and other subjective factors that make sense to you doesn't mean grades aren't playing a role beneath the surface, and just because you sometimes call back people at the bottom of the stack grades-wise doesn't mean that grades are irrlevant at the screener stage. I'd be interested to know if you keep track of a correlation between grades and callbacks from preselect screeners, because without any actual data you're just countering my anecdotal experience with your own.

Also...OBVIOUSLY someone with a PhD in a STEM field is going to outperform their grades, but that's not something a 1L can just go get before OCI and it's a small minority of actual summer associate hires.

And to at least somewhat counter the idea that my callback rate was so much better primarily for non-grade related reasons, I had the same interviewer for one firm the 2nd time around and he literally told me "your grades weren't good enough the first time around even though I liked you" (prior to giving me a callback). I sincerely doubt that joint degree plus interview experience/maturity made anywhere near the difference that going from top 25% to top 5% did.



Return to “Legal Employment?

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.