OCI callbacks thread Forum

[Anonymous User]

Anyone get a sense of whether an interviewer running way over time with you is a good sign?

It's no indication.

I disagree. While I would say that interviews running on time are not indicative of anything, interviews running long are a good sign. The more senior the person that lets an interview run long, the better. Of course you have some people who are just naturally chatty and throw schedules off, but generally speaking, senior partners are not going to run long with people they don't like. In talking about this issue with both attorneys I know but have not interviewed with, as well as attorneys I have interviewed with, there has been a general consensus that long running interviews are, more often than not, a positive reflection on a candidate. Of course, ITE a firm may like many more individuals than they have spots for. I would still say your odds move up if your interviews run long.

[transferguy]

Agreed. I think it's a good thing as well.

[BradyToMoss]

I think it's a good thing if you thought the interview went well. That being said, I got dinged after a screening with 2 partners was supposed to be a half hour and lasted about 75 minutes. But, I got my ass kicked during the interview and didn't expect to receive a callback.

[Anonymous User]

Had a callback today. During the first interview, the guy started by pointing out that I was not on a journal (only 25% get on one) and then just staring blankly for literally 30 or so seconds. That led to a pretty awkward interview. Why that was an issue at a callback seems odd to me, especially coming from an associate.

The other two interviews went well, though, and they were with partners on the hiring committee. So, yeah...have no idea how to feel. By the numbers, I know I had an objectively decent (50+%) shot going in, but that was a real downer to start, especially considering this guy came from a T3.

[NewHere]

During the first interview, the guy started by pointing out that I was not on a journal (only 25% get on one) and then just staring blankly for literally 30 or so seconds. That led to a pretty awkward interview. Why that was an issue at a callback seems odd to me, especially coming from an associate.

I think it's fair game during an interview to ask about this, even during a callback (i.e., after you've supposedly made the grade/resume cutoff). They aren't going to reject you based on the fact that you are not on a journal -- if they were going to, they wouldn't have invited you back -- but an interviewer may ask about it, and may gauge your suitability for employment based (in part) on what you answer. "I'm not on a journal, because I didn't feel like it." is not a good answer. "I'm not on a journal, because I'm doing moot court and I'm a board member of a student group" sounds much better.

Compare this with an interviewee who has grades that are on the lower end compared to the people the interviewing firm usually hires. The firm is not going to reject the person in the callback stage based on that alone, but they may want to drill a little deeper to see what the cause is of the lower grades, whether the candidate knows how to present them, etc.

[klpps]

Anyone get a sense of whether an interviewer running way over time with you is a good sign?

It's no indication.

I think it could be a very good indication, especially if you went over because he wanted to know more about a certain instance. More face time is always a good thing.

[Anonymous User]

During the first interview, the guy started by pointing out that I was not on a journal (only 25% get on one) and then just staring blankly for literally 30 or so seconds. That led to a pretty awkward interview. Why that was an issue at a callback seems odd to me, especially coming from an associate.

I think it's fair game during an interview to ask about this, even during a callback (i.e., after you've supposedly made the grade/resume cutoff). They aren't going to reject you based on the fact that you are not on a journal -- if they were going to, they wouldn't have invited you back -- but an interviewer may ask about it, and may gauge your suitability for employment based (in part) on what you answer. "I'm not on a journal, because I didn't feel like it." is not a good answer. "I'm not on a journal, because I'm doing moot court and I'm a board member of a student group" sounds much better.

Compare this with an interviewee who has grades that are on the lower end compared to the people the interviewing firm usually hires. The firm is not going to reject the person in the callback stage based on that alone, but they may want to drill a little deeper to see what the cause is of the lower grades, whether the candidate knows how to present them, etc.

Say someone has bottom half grades but got a call back. What would be a good way to prepare for these questions? what's a good answer?

[BradyToMoss]

During the first interview, the guy started by pointing out that I was not on a journal (only 25% get on one) and then just staring blankly for literally 30 or so seconds. That led to a pretty awkward interview. Why that was an issue at a callback seems odd to me, especially coming from an associate.

I think it's fair game during an interview to ask about this, even during a callback (i.e., after you've supposedly made the grade/resume cutoff). They aren't going to reject you based on the fact that you are not on a journal -- if they were going to, they wouldn't have invited you back -- but an interviewer may ask about it, and may gauge your suitability for employment based (in part) on what you answer. "I'm not on a journal, because I didn't feel like it." is not a good answer. "I'm not on a journal, because I'm doing moot court and I'm a board member of a student group" sounds much better.

Compare this with an interviewee who has grades that are on the lower end compared to the people the interviewing firm usually hires. The firm is not going to reject the person in the callback stage based on that alone, but they may want to drill a little deeper to see what the cause is of the lower grades, whether the candidate knows how to present them, etc.

Say someone has bottom half grades but got a call back. What would be a good way to prepare for these questions? what's a good answer?

If I had lower grades I would claim I had to work 50 hours/week to pay my way through law school.

[Anonymous User]

During the first interview, the guy started by pointing out that I was not on a journal (only 25% get on one) and then just staring blankly for literally 30 or so seconds. That led to a pretty awkward interview. Why that was an issue at a callback seems odd to me, especially coming from an associate.

I think it's fair game during an interview to ask about this, even during a callback (i.e., after you've supposedly made the grade/resume cutoff). They aren't going to reject you based on the fact that you are not on a journal -- if they were going to, they wouldn't have invited you back -- but an interviewer may ask about it, and may gauge your suitability for employment based (in part) on what you answer. "I'm not on a journal, because I didn't feel like it." is not a good answer. "I'm not on a journal, because I'm doing moot court and I'm a board member of a student group" sounds much better.

Compare this with an interviewee who has grades that are on the lower end compared to the people the interviewing firm usually hires. The firm is not going to reject the person in the callback stage based on that alone, but they may want to drill a little deeper to see what the cause is of the lower grades, whether the candidate knows how to present them, etc.

Say someone has bottom half grades but got a call back. What would be a good way to prepare for these questions? what's a good answer?

If I had lower grades I would claim I had to work 50 hours/week to pay my way through law school.

You mean you'd lie?

[NewHere]

Yeah, never lie of course.

Good answers depend on your circumstances. You could emphasize the classes where you did have good grades, and how you really liked those. If you have very special circumstances (health issues, someone died in your family) that's of course something you could reasonably bring up, but otherwise don't look for excuses. It sounds a lot more mature if you don't try to make excuses for mediocre grades.

What I meant by "drilling deeper" is also that an interviewer might want to find out if bad grades are a matter of poor exam skills or poor understanding. He or she might try to draw you into a discussion about a substantive law issue (e.g., by asking you about your 1L job, or by asking you about a class), to find out if you are able to talk competently about legal issues. If you can, then your grades won't work against you. (A person with great grades might not get such questions at the callback stage -- interviewers will be confident that the legal abilities of the person are fine and may focus more on personality, etc.)

[Anonymous User]

I feel stupid asking this question, but here goes.

I took a summer class, and the grade was just released. My overall GPA rose a teeny bit--from 3.x42 to 3.x49.

I'm still waiting on firms after callbacks, and someone suggested I send the firms updated transcripts. Is the change in my GPA so miniscule that sending an updated transcript is silly? Also, I know that everything counts ITE, but if firms are hesitant about hiring me, it's probably not because my original GPA was too low--I don't think they're going to see my .007 increase and decide I'm smart enough for them after all.

[Anonymous User]

Say someone has bottom half grades but got a call back. What would be a good way to prepare for these questions? what's a good answer?

These sorts of questions are more about how you handle uncomfortable questions than really trying to get a substantive answer to them. The reality is that you are going to screw up A LOT as a junior associate. People want to see how you will handle that and asking about a shortcoming on your resume is a good way to test it. A good answer will:

1. Take responsibility for the shortcoming with out making excuses or trying to deflect.
2. Move on to the lessons you have taken away.

So, something to the effect of "Yes, my first year grades were quite below the expectations I set for myself and out of step with the performance I saw in undergraduate coursework. I believe that it was the result of (not adapting my study strategies quickly enough/learning a new way of writing that was completely different from what my previous course work prepared me for/not allocating my time properly between classes (this can be an effective one if you have some course you did very well in but maybe overstudied for or overcommitted to ECs)/etc.). This summer I really focused on re-evaluating the way I will approach course work and I also found that the experience I gained (explain something brief and relevant from your summer job) gave me a better perspective on how to (fill in shortcoming)." Of course in a conversational tone and not nearly as formal or rehearsed sounding

[Dick Whitman]

I feel stupid asking this question, but here goes.

I took a summer class, and the grade was just released. My overall GPA rose a teeny bit--from 3.x42 to 3.x49.

I'm still waiting on firms after callbacks, and someone suggested I send the firms updated transcripts. Is the change in my GPA so miniscule that sending an updated transcript is silly? Also, I know that everything counts ITE, but if firms are hesitant about hiring me, it's probably not because my original GPA was too low--I don't think they're going to see my .007 increase and decide I'm smart enough for them after all.

This is a good excuse to let firms know you are still interested in them. Do it.

[Anonymous User]

T14
3.67-4.0
Midwest/South
OCI: 4 callbacks, 7 dings, 1 pending
non-OCI: 3 screening interviews, 1 callback (w/out a screening interview), 9 dings, 9 pending

Midwest: 1-4 (callbacks-dings)
South: 4-12

AmLaw 50: 4-5
AmLaw 51-100: 0-3
non-AmLaw 100: 1-8

No word back on any of the office visits yet.

Updated.

[TTT-LS]

.

[Anonymous User]

During the first interview, the guy started by pointing out that I was not on a journal (only 25% get on one) and then just staring blankly for literally 30 or so seconds. That led to a pretty awkward interview. Why that was an issue at a callback seems odd to me, especially coming from an associate.

I think it's fair game during an interview to ask about this, even during a callback (i.e., after you've supposedly made the grade/resume cutoff). They aren't going to reject you based on the fact that you are not on a journal -- if they were going to, they wouldn't have invited you back -- but an interviewer may ask about it, and may gauge your suitability for employment based (in part) on what you answer. "I'm not on a journal, because I didn't feel like it." is not a good answer. "I'm not on a journal, because I'm doing moot court and I'm a board member of a student group" sounds much better.

Compare this with an interviewee who has grades that are on the lower end compared to the people the interviewing firm usually hires. The firm is not going to reject the person in the callback stage based on that alone, but they may want to drill a little deeper to see what the cause is of the lower grades, whether the candidate knows how to present them, etc.

I mean, only 25% of my people get on a journal at my school. It's not like some places where students basically can choose whether or not they want to be on. I didn't answer that I wasn't on a journal BECAUSE I was doing moot court, I said I wasn't on a journal and that I plan on doing Moot Court. I think saying "I'm not doing a journal BECAUSE I'm doing Moot Court" comes off as disingenuous, unless the GPA is really high and there was actually a choice involved.

As far as my grades go, she asked for my rank, and I gave it. I did significantly better in my second semester and maybe I should have brought that up, but that seems a bit whiny to me as well. I much prefer the "here are my grades and here is my rank" approach. "I plan on doing X in the future."

It was more than just this, though. He was a very awkward person.

If I had lower grades I would claim I had to work 50 hours/week to pay my way through law school.

If it is this big of a deal, then a firm shouldn't call back.

[Anonymous User]

T14
Top 15%
Moot Court, Secondary Journal

18 screening interviews.
11 rejects (from the screening)
4 callbacks
1 offer (v20)

probably "waitlisted" at 3 firms b/c I had a screening but no snail mail rejection yet.

[Anonymous User]

T14
Top 15%
Moot Court, Secondary Journal

18 screening interviews.
11 rejects (from the screening)
4 callbacks
1 offer (v20)

probably "waitlisted" at 3 firms b/c I had a screening but no snail mail rejection yet.

how long ago was your OCI?

[Anonymous User]

I had a callback at my top choice two weeks ago and they said I'd probably know by Friday (as in yesterday). I missed a call from them around 5pm last night and they didn't leave a message!! Good news? Bad news? Anyone have any experience with this?

Everyone I've talked to seems to think it's probably good since it's unlikely they'd take the time to call to reject me...

[johnadams]

probably good news. i've gotten offers via voicemail only requesting a call back.

[RATRATRAT]

I've never heard of an over the phone rejection like that (not that it is impossible), so I would say preemptive congratulations are in order.

[Anonymous User]

how long ago was your OCI

More than three weeks ago.

[Anonymous User]

anyone have offers from winston & strawn sf?

[Anonymous User]

I had a callback at my top choice two weeks ago and they said I'd probably know by Friday (as in yesterday). I missed a call from them around 5pm last night and they didn't leave a message!! Good news? Bad news? Anyone have any experience with this?

Everyone I've talked to seems to think it's probably good since it's unlikely they'd take the time to call to reject me...

Not to be a downer I'm skeptical only because they did not leave a message. I think if it was an offer they would have asked you to call back. A lot of firms in this economy are making phone call rejections, giving the "its not you its me" speech (referring to firm cut backs). But I sincerely wish you the best. I could be completely wrong and I really hope I am.

[BradyToMoss]

I've never heard of an over the phone rejection like that (not that it is impossible), so I would say preemptive congratulations are in order.

Over the phone rejections have happened in past years, and are happening this year. No message is also a pretty bad sign, IMO.