Penn OCI Forum

[Anonymous User]

I thought this was as good a place as any to post this question, let me know if you have any thoughts.

I'm one of the OCI interviewers at Penn for my firm and I'm trying to think back to what good interviewers did/did not do, especially since this is not only about finding great candidates, but also convincing them that my firm is somewhere they'd want to work. Do you feel like there are certain questions that break the ice best or that you are prepared for but no one ever asks? I think we'll have to do the obligatory "why X city" "why our firm" "what are your interests", only because we'll need to report back to the firm, but I'd like to actually get to know candidates beyond the super rehearsed Q&A that tends to happen. Having the same exact conversation 20 times in a day does not sound fun

Happy to answer any questions too, though this is my first OCI trip. I did do some callback interviews last year.

To what extent does a preferred practice influence hiring decisions? Does it differ wildly between firms?

[Anonymous User]

I thought this was as good a place as any to post this question, let me know if you have any thoughts.

I'm one of the OCI interviewers at Penn for my firm and I'm trying to think back to what good interviewers did/did not do, especially since this is not only about finding great candidates, but also convincing them that my firm is somewhere they'd want to work. Do you feel like there are certain questions that break the ice best or that you are prepared for but no one ever asks? I think we'll have to do the obligatory "why X city" "why our firm" "what are your interests", only because we'll need to report back to the firm, but I'd like to actually get to know candidates beyond the super rehearsed Q&A that tends to happen. Having the same exact conversation 20 times in a day does not sound fun

Happy to answer any questions too, though this is my first OCI trip. I did do some callback interviews last year.

Question for you or anyone: I want to do transactional work, but really don't know how to answer the "So why transactional?" question other than "I don't want to do litigation." Whats a good answer to that question?

[Anonymous User]

I thought this was as good a place as any to post this question, let me know if you have any thoughts.

I'm one of the OCI interviewers at Penn for my firm and I'm trying to think back to what good interviewers did/did not do, especially since this is not only about finding great candidates, but also convincing them that my firm is somewhere they'd want to work. Do you feel like there are certain questions that break the ice best or that you are prepared for but no one ever asks? I think we'll have to do the obligatory "why X city" "why our firm" "what are your interests", only because we'll need to report back to the firm, but I'd like to actually get to know candidates beyond the super rehearsed Q&A that tends to happen. Having the same exact conversation 20 times in a day does not sound fun

Happy to answer any questions too, though this is my first OCI trip. I did do some callback interviews last year.

To what extent does a preferred practice influence hiring decisions? Does it differ wildly between firms?

I think it depends greatly on the firm and what the practice is. If the group in that office is very small (e.g. its a 5 person international trade group), they have to be very careful not to get 3 people with their hearts set on that group. All of the firms have differently structured summer programs and that will probably provide some indication of how much they care about which group you lean toward (always good to ask them to talk about the pros/cons of their summer program structure). Some have you rotate through 3 or 4 practice groups where you work exclusively with them for those periods, some have a free market system where you seek out your own work (or get sought out), some have a coordinator who will make sure you have enough work and are managing it well.

I think its best to have an idea of your interests (lit v. regulatory v. corporate) and know a bit about what subsets of those broad practices do. If you are really undecided, try to figure out what areas of the firm are particularly busy (different firms are experiencing slumps across a variety of practices) and see if any of your interests line up with those groups.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone start mass mailing yet? I was going to wait until we find out what journals we're on, but I'm thinking it might be best to start doing some this weekend. Should I just start?

[Anonymous User]

Anyone start mass mailing yet? I was going to wait until we find out what journals we're on, but I'm thinking it might be best to start doing some this weekend. Should I just start?

Definitely start now. It'll be a lot closer to OCI by the time we find out so the sooner the better. If you get any screeners, you'll just have to bring an updated resume w/your journal to the interview. It's also better to start now because I've already heard of a couple people getting offers.

[Anonymous User]

26 / 60

[r6_philly]

Question for you or anyone: I want to do transactional work, but really don't know how to answer the "So why transactional?" question other than "I don't want to do litigation." Whats a good answer to that question?

That's the answer you get when you talk to transactional associates. So think about this: what you like about being a lawyer - what you don't like about litigation = why you like transactional. If you can't come up with much, then you don't really want to be a lawyer, which is a whole nother problem.

[EdwardIV]

Any idea why MoFo backed out?

[r6_philly]

To what extent does a preferred practice influence hiring decisions? Does it differ wildly between firms?

Depends on the firm. Some firms have needs for all areas, some others don't. Also different groups may have different hiring standards within the same firm. There is no way to tell, just go with what you really feel.

Caveat: If you going to QE and ask to do corporate you obviously aren't going to get a callback. So don't do that, know who you are talking to.

[Anonymous User]

Question for you or anyone: I want to do transactional work, but really don't know how to answer the "So why transactional?" question other than "I don't want to do litigation." Whats a good answer to that question?

That's the answer you get when you talk to transactional associates. So think about this: what you like about being a lawyer - what you don't like about litigation = why you like transactional. If you can't come up with much, then you don't really want to be a lawyer, which is a whole nother problem.

Thanks R6. I love researching and solving problems, which is why I was attracted to law. I worked for a judge this summer and thats what made me realize that litigation probably isn't for me, so should I even mention that?

[r6_philly]

Question for you or anyone: I want to do transactional work, but really don't know how to answer the "So why transactional?" question other than "I don't want to do litigation." Whats a good answer to that question?

That's the answer you get when you talk to transactional associates. So think about this: what you like about being a lawyer - what you don't like about litigation = why you like transactional. If you can't come up with much, then you don't really want to be a lawyer, which is a whole nother problem.

Thanks R6. I love researching and solving problems, which is why I was attracted to law. I worked for a judge this summer and thats what made me realize that litigation probably isn't for me, so should I even mention that?

Yes -- if the person interviewing is not a litigator. They can relate. If it is a litigator, then you want to talk about why you like transactional work, not why you hate litigation. There are some stock answers to why transactional, but I suggest you give it some deep thought and come up with some substantive ones. The difficult thing is, you don't really have any idea what it means to be a transactional lawyer (law school does not teach). So unless you really have good reasons, you might end up like it even less than litigation. And be aware that different transactional lawyers work on completely different things -- a capital market/securities lawyer will not overlap much with a M&A/Corp lawyer.

[Anonymous User]

Do we know where median is? I've heard anywhere from 3.27-3.5.

[Anonymous User]

Do we know where median is? I've heard anywhere from 3.27-3.5.

~3.28 seems to be the best guess I've seen. Almost definitely not higher than 3.3 though.

[Anonymous User]

Do we know where median is? I've heard anywhere from 3.27-3.5.

~3.28 seems to be the best guess I've seen. Almost definitely not higher than 3.3 though.

Weighted? 3.28 weighted?

[Anonymous User]

Do we know where median is? I've heard anywhere from 3.27-3.5.

~3.28 seems to be the best guess I've seen. Almost definitely not higher than 3.3 though.

Weighted? 3.28 weighted?

Unweighted. Its impossible (AFAIK, anyway) to really tell how the electives change it (if they change it at all).

[Anonymous User]

Do we know where median is? I've heard anywhere from 3.27-3.5.

~3.28 seems to be the best guess I've seen. Almost definitely not higher than 3.3 though.

Weighted? 3.28 weighted?

Unweighted. Its impossible (AFAIK, anyway) to really tell how the electives change it (if they change it at all).

What you just said doesn't make any sense. "Weighted" doesn't change the grades just the credits.

[Anonymous User]

What you just said doesn't make any sense. "Weighted" doesn't change the grades just the credits.

Maybe I should explain myself a bit more. I think they're a bit weird because I don't think all of them were graded the same as the regular classes. Bankruptcy was a mix of 1L's and 2L's/3L's, and I think there was one small seminar type class (and rumor I heard was the grades there were heavily inflated).

[Anonymous User]

Actually, now I think I understand what you're saying. And I don't really know.

[Anonymous User]

I don't really know how accurately you can tell what median GPA is, I guess you base it off grade distributions? I did better in my electives last semester but since they are worth less credits, my GPA is slightly lower than if they were all the same amount of credits.

Also, the electives would seem (to me, at least) to be more lenient in terms of the curve. I know some of my friends in the smaller sized electives said that there was not a curve, and at least one of the electives (if last year's grade distribution was anything to go off of for this year) had a much more generous A/B split than the other standard 1L courses.

So if you're guessing medians based on the 1L curve, my first guess would be that it is underestimated, since electives are "easier" to get higher grades in. But then my next thought after that is, since they aren't worth as many credits, they won't affect the GPA as much as if they were 4 credits.

Just rambling my thoughts, that probably didn't help.

[Anonymous User]

Question for you or anyone: I want to do transactional work, but really don't know how to answer the "So why transactional?" question other than "I don't want to do litigation." Whats a good answer to that question?

That's the answer you get when you talk to transactional associates. So think about this: what you like about being a lawyer - what you don't like about litigation = why you like transactional. If you can't come up with much, then you don't really want to be a lawyer, which is a whole nother problem.

Thanks R6. I love researching and solving problems, which is why I was attracted to law. I worked for a judge this summer and thats what made me realize that litigation probably isn't for me, so should I even mention that?

Yes -- if the person interviewing is not a litigator. They can relate. If it is a litigator, then you want to talk about why you like transactional work, not why you hate litigation. There are some stock answers to why transactional, but I suggest you give it some deep thought and come up with some substantive ones. The difficult thing is, you don't really have any idea what it means to be a transactional lawyer (law school does not teach). So unless you really have good reasons, you might end up like it even less than litigation. And be aware that different transactional lawyers work on completely different things -- a capital market/securities lawyer will not overlap much with a M&A/Corp lawyer.

The bolded is very true. There are so many different kinds of transactional lawyers. I do M&A work primarily and I could NEVER see myself enjoying securities or financing work. I'm happy to pitch in on a matter when called upon, but as a daily job, those things would not make me happy. Without a banking background or some other relevant background, it'll be hard to explain why you KNOW you want to do transactional work (and for all you know, you may hate it). Researching and solving problems sounds more like consulting and litigation than corporate, we do a lot of paper pushing and you have to find excitement in the overarching goal or some smaller aspect of your day. I think the highlight of my day is when clients call to talk about the issues from their point of view and you have to think quickly to come up with an intelligent response because they need to feel like they can call you and trust your opinion and input. Those interactions are the most challenging and the most rewarding, and they don't usually happen for associates in litigation.

[SportsFan]

Anyone heard back from Law Review yet? Congrats if so.

[Anonymous User]

Does con law journal look better than business even if we have an interest in transactional work?

[Anonymous User]

Anyone heard back from Law Review yet? Congrats if so.

Thanks.

[Anonymous User]

Got JBL! Very excited about it.

[Anonymous User]

Got JBL! Very excited about it.

Nice dude! Why so excited? I thought we were all guaranteed a journal.