What is needed to get hired at Cravath? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Like every biglaw firm worth a salt, the firm represents people who are highly influential, wealthy and facing claims or doing deals with implications that raise moral questions. But can most biglaw firms say they're as involved in supporting good causes as Cravath? Obviously this doesn't balance whatever "morally bankrupt" work we do (put aside whether that's a fair accusation), but we are often the biggest donors to major humane causes and we do pro bono work with big players like ACLU, Brennan, Lamda Legal, etc.

You must be kidding if you really believe this... Is this a troll, or is this person serious?

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

I had a callback at Cravath (didn’t get an offer) and had the sense that it was not somewhere I would enjoy working. After the callback, I read this article which describes two stories involving Cravath attorneys (one at length and the other in passing at the end): https://www.nysun.com/new-york/fugitive ... ape/28483/.

[AMTAnLSAT]

I did a CB at Cravath for their litigation practice. If you want an offer, my advice is to drink the kool-aid.

Cravath has a very particular culture with attributes that make it an extremely insular place. Think about its defining features: (1) they maintain a small geographic footprint, (2) they do not take laterals, (3) they have a strict lockstep compensation model for associates and partners, (4) they work associates very hard and rotate them into new practices every year, (5) they believe they are the best

When a firm doesn't take laterals, there's no one to push back on dumb work practices (because no one has worked anywhere better). When a firm only has one real office, it can keep a tight grip on the culture -- associates don't compare themselves to their peers in the chill west coast office. When you believe you're the best, you can rationalize your way into a lot of bullshit (i.e. sure my classmates from law school work fewer hours doing the same sort of stuff, but my firm is the best). The associates who stay and make partner (and make hiring decision) are drowning in the kool-aid. Every single one of the partners I interviewed with described Cravath as "a very special place" (those exact words).

I didn't get an offer, and I think it's because I made the mistake of questioning the firm's culture. I'm a business-oriented person who is interested in the tradeoffs of various business models. I was convinced that Cravath was increasingly vulnerable. I couldn't resist asking them about the weaknesses of the Cravath model (e.g. when a firm doesn't take laterals, it risks being understaffed; when a firm commits to a strict lockstep compensation, it's likely to lose rainmaker partners). I'm pretty sure I alienated the partners and lost the offer as a result.

So upshot: drink the kool-aid.

[galba]

I didn't get an offer, and I think it's because I made the mistake of questioning the firm's culture. I'm a business-oriented person who is interested in the tradeoffs of various business models. I was convinced that Cravath was increasingly vulnerable. I couldn't resist asking them about the weaknesses of the Cravath model (e.g. when a firm doesn't take laterals, it risks being understaffed; when a firm commits to a strict lockstep compensation, it's likely to lose rainmaker partners). I'm pretty sure I alienated the partners and lost the offer as a result.

So upshot: drink the kool-aid.

This seems less "drinking the kool-aid," more behaving like a normal person in an interview setting. Callbacks aren't exactly the ideal time to interrogate partners about the "weaknesses" of their business model. I'm pretty sure Cravath partners are not uniquely hostile to advice on running their firm, during an interview, from a law student who's never actually practiced (no matter how "business-oriented").

(For the record, I received and declined a Cravath offer, and agree they seemed to have a weird and unappealing culture.)

[AMTAnLSAT]

I didn't get an offer, and I think it's because I made the mistake of questioning the firm's culture. I'm a business-oriented person who is interested in the tradeoffs of various business models. I was convinced that Cravath was increasingly vulnerable. I couldn't resist asking them about the weaknesses of the Cravath model (e.g. when a firm doesn't take laterals, it risks being understaffed; when a firm commits to a strict lockstep compensation, it's likely to lose rainmaker partners). I'm pretty sure I alienated the partners and lost the offer as a result.

So upshot: drink the kool-aid.

This seems less "drinking the kool-aid," more behaving like a normal person in an interview setting. Callbacks aren't exactly the ideal time to interrogate partners about the "weaknesses" of their business model. I'm pretty sure Cravath partners are not uniquely hostile to advice on running their firm, during an interview, from a law student who's never actually practiced (no matter how "business-oriented").

(For the record, I received and declined a Cravath offer, and agree they seemed to have a weird and unappealing culture.)

Definitely true! It was a mistake. I just wanted to highlight the point because folks might be more inclined to ask these sort of questions at a firm like Cravath, where there are so many odd quirks. Be a normal person - save the questions, and ask them after you have the offer!

[Anonymous User]

I didn't get an offer, and I think it's because I made the mistake of questioning the firm's culture. I'm a business-oriented person who is interested in the tradeoffs of various business models. I was convinced that Cravath was increasingly vulnerable. I couldn't resist asking them about the weaknesses of the Cravath model (e.g. when a firm doesn't take laterals, it risks being understaffed; when a firm commits to a strict lockstep compensation, it's likely to lose rainmaker partners). I'm pretty sure I alienated the partners and lost the offer as a result.

So upshot: drink the kool-aid.

This seems less "drinking the kool-aid," more behaving like a normal person in an interview setting. Callbacks aren't exactly the ideal time to interrogate partners about the "weaknesses" of their business model. I'm pretty sure Cravath partners are not uniquely hostile to advice on running their firm, during an interview, from a law student who's never actually practiced (no matter how "business-oriented").

(For the record, I received and declined a Cravath offer, and agree they seemed to have a weird and unappealing culture.)

Definitely true! It was a mistake. I just wanted to highlight the point because folks might be more inclined to ask these sort of questions at a firm like Cravath, where there are so many odd quirks. Be a normal person - save the questions, and ask them after you have the offer!

I had a CB at Cravath for my 1L year summer (after 1L first semester). The interview process was awful because the interviews had no time limits. I spoke to a much older partner for over an hour. Then I spoke with a partner who looked at my resume clearly looking to ask about a class in which I got my lowest grade and why it happened -- but there was no class in which I got lower than the best grade -- so he then asked me why I only took three classes instead of four because he went to Harvard and at Harvard they take four classes 1L. At my school, we took three classes plus legal writing and there was obviously no choice.

When I did my OCI prior to 2L, I decided to grill the partners who interviewed me. I told them that I had "heard" (which is true and from someone knowledgeable) that Cravath used to be a big deal because it was considered to be above other firms and, therefore, you could easily lateral anywhere, but that now it was considered on par with multiple other V10 firms, and asked what they thought about that etc. etc. etc. Needless to say, I did not get a CB. That was fine by me. It was quite fun.

[ExpOriental]

I didn't get an offer, and I think it's because I made the mistake of questioning the firm's culture. I'm a business-oriented person who is interested in the tradeoffs of various business models. I was convinced that Cravath was increasingly vulnerable. I couldn't resist asking them about the weaknesses of the Cravath model (e.g. when a firm doesn't take laterals, it risks being understaffed; when a firm commits to a strict lockstep compensation, it's likely to lose rainmaker partners). I'm pretty sure I alienated the partners and lost the offer as a result.

So upshot: drink the kool-aid.

This seems less "drinking the kool-aid," more behaving like a normal person in an interview setting. Callbacks aren't exactly the ideal time to interrogate partners about the "weaknesses" of their business model. I'm pretty sure Cravath partners are not uniquely hostile to advice on running their firm, during an interview, from a law student who's never actually practiced (no matter how "business-oriented").

(For the record, I received and declined a Cravath offer, and agree they seemed to have a weird and unappealing culture.)

Definitely true! It was a mistake. I just wanted to highlight the point because folks might be more inclined to ask these sort of questions at a firm like Cravath, where there are so many odd quirks. Be a normal person - save the questions, and ask them after you have the offer!

I had a CB at Cravath for my 1L year summer (after 1L first semester). The interview process was awful because the interviews had no time limits. I spoke to a much older partner for over an hour. Then I spoke with a partner who looked at my resume clearly looking to ask about a class in which I got my lowest grade and why it happened -- but there was no class in which I got lower than the best grade -- so he then asked me why I only took three classes instead of four because he went to Harvard and at Harvard they take four classes 1L. At my school, we took three classes plus legal writing and there was obviously no choice.

When I did my OCI prior to 2L, I decided to grill the partners who interviewed me. I told them that I had "heard" (which is true and from someone knowledgeable) that Cravath used to be a big deal because it was considered to be above other firms and, therefore, you could easily lateral anywhere, but that now it was considered on par with multiple other V10 firms, and asked what they thought about that etc. etc. etc. Needless to say, I did not get a CB. That was fine by me. It was quite fun.

You come across as totally humble and down to earth, not like those douchebags at Cravath

[Anonymous User]

I didn't get an offer, and I think it's because I made the mistake of questioning the firm's culture. I'm a business-oriented person who is interested in the tradeoffs of various business models. I was convinced that Cravath was increasingly vulnerable. I couldn't resist asking them about the weaknesses of the Cravath model (e.g. when a firm doesn't take laterals, it risks being understaffed; when a firm commits to a strict lockstep compensation, it's likely to lose rainmaker partners). I'm pretty sure I alienated the partners and lost the offer as a result.

So upshot: drink the kool-aid.

This seems less "drinking the kool-aid," more behaving like a normal person in an interview setting. Callbacks aren't exactly the ideal time to interrogate partners about the "weaknesses" of their business model. I'm pretty sure Cravath partners are not uniquely hostile to advice on running their firm, during an interview, from a law student who's never actually practiced (no matter how "business-oriented").

(For the record, I received and declined a Cravath offer, and agree they seemed to have a weird and unappealing culture.)

Definitely true! It was a mistake. I just wanted to highlight the point because folks might be more inclined to ask these sort of questions at a firm like Cravath, where there are so many odd quirks. Be a normal person - save the questions, and ask them after you have the offer!

I had a CB at Cravath for my 1L year summer (after 1L first semester). The interview process was awful because the interviews had no time limits. I spoke to a much older partner for over an hour. Then I spoke with a partner who looked at my resume clearly looking to ask about a class in which I got my lowest grade and why it happened -- but there was no class in which I got lower than the best grade -- so he then asked me why I only took three classes instead of four because he went to Harvard and at Harvard they take four classes 1L. At my school, we took three classes plus legal writing and there was obviously no choice.

When I did my OCI prior to 2L, I decided to grill the partners who interviewed me. I told them that I had "heard" (which is true and from someone knowledgeable) that Cravath used to be a big deal because it was considered to be above other firms and, therefore, you could easily lateral anywhere, but that now it was considered on par with multiple other V10 firms, and asked what they thought about that etc. etc. etc. Needless to say, I did not get a CB. That was fine by me. It was quite fun.

How did the partners even respond to this epic trolling?

[Anonymous User]

LOVE IT

[Anonymous User]

I didn't get an offer, and I think it's because I made the mistake of questioning the firm's culture. I'm a business-oriented person who is interested in the tradeoffs of various business models. I was convinced that Cravath was increasingly vulnerable. I couldn't resist asking them about the weaknesses of the Cravath model (e.g. when a firm doesn't take laterals, it risks being understaffed; when a firm commits to a strict lockstep compensation, it's likely to lose rainmaker partners). I'm pretty sure I alienated the partners and lost the offer as a result.

So upshot: drink the kool-aid.

This seems less "drinking the kool-aid," more behaving like a normal person in an interview setting. Callbacks aren't exactly the ideal time to interrogate partners about the "weaknesses" of their business model. I'm pretty sure Cravath partners are not uniquely hostile to advice on running their firm, during an interview, from a law student who's never actually practiced (no matter how "business-oriented").

(For the record, I received and declined a Cravath offer, and agree they seemed to have a weird and unappealing culture.)

Do you mind elaborating on what interviewing with them was like - particularly at the callback stage - and what was exactly weird about them? I'm kind of curious if you need to prep differently for interviews with super "elite" firms like Cravath. I think I'm an average interviewer (e.g., for my finance-related work before law school, for law school applications, and for a 1L summer job at V100 firm in a secondary market) and tend to be more casual/conversational, I guess. It's worked out thus far, but I'm wondering if you really have "bring your A-game" to firms like Cravath and be super polished/preppy/etc. -- or if it's the same as interviewing for anywhere else! Ratchet state-school me would appreciate any advice!

[Sackboy]

Do you mind elaborating on what interviewing with them was like - particularly at the callback stage - and what was exactly weird about them? I'm kind of curious if you need to prep differently for interviews with super "elite" firms like Cravath. I think I'm an average interviewer (e.g., for my finance-related work before law school, for law school applications, and for a 1L summer job at V100 firm in a secondary market) and tend to be more casual/conversational, I guess. It's worked out thus far, but I'm wondering if you really have "bring your A-game" to firms like Cravath and be super polished/preppy/etc. -- or if it's the same as interviewing for anywhere else! Ratchet state-school me would appreciate any advice!

It's the same as it is everywhere. Just be alert and engaged. That seemed to work for me, at least.

[Anonymous User]

Do you mind elaborating on what interviewing with them was like - particularly at the callback stage - and what was exactly weird about them? I'm kind of curious if you need to prep differently for interviews with super "elite" firms like Cravath. I think I'm an average interviewer (e.g., for my finance-related work before law school, for law school applications, and for a 1L summer job at V100 firm in a secondary market) and tend to be more casual/conversational, I guess. It's worked out thus far, but I'm wondering if you really have "bring your A-game" to firms like Cravath and be super polished/preppy/etc. -- or if it's the same as interviewing for anywhere else! Ratchet state-school me would appreciate any advice!

It's the same as it is everywhere. Just be alert and engaged. That seemed to work for me, at least.

Good to hear! Thanks

[Anonymous User]

It's the same as it is everywhere. Just be alert and engaged. That seemed to work for me, at least.

Agreed. If you're good at normal OCI screeners and callbacks, you'll be good at Cravath's.

One thing to note: if you're the type of person that likes heading into interviews with an in-depth dossier on each interviewer (bio, background, tailoring questions in advance, etc.), Cravath's "adjust your interviewing schedule on the fly" thing can mess with that. And I'd classify most of the Cravath partners I met towards the "intense" end of the spectrum, but you'll encounter similarly intense personalities at every firm, throughout the process.

[Anonymous User]

Just contributing my anecdote to this thread which is that the #1 most notorious gunner at my YSH gunned for Cravath for some reason and secured a pre-OCI offer from the firm (and then bragged about it on social media during the beginning of OCI interviews)


This was not just an annoying gunner, but one of the toxic gunners that would absolutely push a classmate off of a cliff if they thought it would benefit them on the curve. Just a vile, nasty sociopath that was universally disliked at my school.

They must not have been a very competent gunner if they only got Cravath.

I'm the quoted Anon, and that's exactly why this anecdote stood out to me. For whatever reason, that sweet prestige of Cravath being #1 on Vault to that gunner was like a bright lamp to a moth on a cool summer night. They really went out of their way to gun hard specifically for Cravath to secure that pre-OCI offer.

I know tons of other gunners that gunned for things like appellate lit in DC, which makes sense because those positions are genuinely difficult to obtain, but why gun for Cravath? It makes very little sense to me.

Don't get me wrong, Cravath is clearly a great firm, but there are like 15 firms that are just as good, and Cravath is on a notable downtrend. You have big departures like Scott Barshay, and just in terms of RPL, PPEP, total revenue, etc. Cravath just is not how it used to be when it was heads and shoulders above every other firm.

[Anonymous User]

A smart person I know at HLS was torn between accepting an offer at Cravath ("V1") vs. accepting Skadden ("V2") — they ultimately chose Cravath. This person didn't explicitly frame their decision in terms of Vault, but I think that was a big factor. And when I, who goes to an NYC school, told this HLS person I was choosing [a "lower ranked" firm] over Cravath, they were nonplussed and acted as if they had barely heard of [this other elite NY firm].

At the time, I over-generalized and chalked it up to "people from the HLS hinterlands are not steeped in NYC biglaw culture, so they rely more on Vault for guidance," but it was probably just this one person acting kind of strange and naïve.

[Anonymous User]

[duplicate]

[Anonymous User]

I summered at CSM. Yes, for both lit and corporate, I think you can compare CSM to the other more old-school NY firms like DPW and S&C. Yes, the name prestige is silly, but it doesn't hurt to have either.

The one thing I would caution you about is that the old school ny firms have a somewhat different culture and working environment than big national firms like Latham and Kirkland. The big national firms have a more competitive internal system and a bigger focus on growth, hence the departures for Kirkland other posters wrote about. A focus on growth has ups and downs - ups in terms of your bonus, downs because high growth firms lay people off during recessions.

Cravath is sort of the peak of being old-fashioned for NY firms. As an associate you don't have to network with anyone to get work. You are just assigned work and you do it. You also don't have a billable requirement for your bonus. Competition is "unseemly" or something like that. I personally liked that, but not everyone does. Someone mentioned earlier that an automatic DQ in the interviews is being a "prick." This is why.

[Anonymous User]

I summered at CSM. Yes, for both lit and corporate, I think you can compare CSM to the other more old-school NY firms like DPW and S&C. Yes, the name prestige is silly, but it doesn't hurt to have either.

The one thing I would caution you about is that the old school ny firms have a somewhat different culture and working environment than big national firms like Latham and Kirkland. The big national firms have a more competitive internal system and a bigger focus on growth, hence the departures for Kirkland other posters wrote about. A focus on growth has ups and downs - ups in terms of your bonus, downs because high growth firms lay people off during recessions.

Cravath is sort of the peak of being old-fashioned for NY firms. As an associate you don't have to network with anyone to get work. You are just assigned work and you do it. You also don't have a billable requirement for your bonus. Competition is "unseemly" or something like that. I personally liked that, but not everyone does. Someone mentioned earlier that an automatic DQ in the interviews is being a "prick." This is why.

Definitely have had friends from there say that after a few weeks/months in at least some groups the partners do clearly choose their favorites. The good thing is if you're a favorite you're pretty set since you'll build a good deal sheet, which since partners talk among themselves, will only continue to get better. Point being it's not a bad idea to network there.

[Anonymous User]

I summered at CSM. Yes, for both lit and corporate, I think you can compare CSM to the other more old-school NY firms like DPW and S&C. Yes, the name prestige is silly, but it doesn't hurt to have either.

The one thing I would caution you about is that the old school ny firms have a somewhat different culture and working environment than big national firms like Latham and Kirkland. The big national firms have a more competitive internal system and a bigger focus on growth, hence the departures for Kirkland other posters wrote about. A focus on growth has ups and downs - ups in terms of your bonus, downs because high growth firms lay people off during recessions.

Cravath is sort of the peak of being old-fashioned for NY firms. As an associate you don't have to network with anyone to get work. You are just assigned work and you do it. You also don't have a billable requirement for your bonus. Competition is "unseemly" or something like that. I personally liked that, but not everyone does. Someone mentioned earlier that an automatic DQ in the interviews is being a "prick." This is why.

There is a lot of inaccurate information in this comment. As the other poster mentioned, networking and relationships matter at Cravath, as much as it does in any other firms or any other working environment. Partners pick favorites, within their rotation/teams/deals/cases, and the favored ones get the best work and experience. Associates also fall out of favor quickly too, for whatever reason. Although you don't have a billable requirement, partners absolutely track hours and there is a pressure and reward (in terms of being favored) for billing a lot. Finally, the firm is not above competition; it is a business after all and if it wants to thrive, it has to compete.

[Anonymous User]

I summered at CSM. Yes, for both lit and corporate, I think you can compare CSM to the other more old-school NY firms like DPW and S&C. Yes, the name prestige is silly, but it doesn't hurt to have either.

The one thing I would caution you about is that the old school ny firms have a somewhat different culture and working environment than big national firms like Latham and Kirkland. The big national firms have a more competitive internal system and a bigger focus on growth, hence the departures for Kirkland other posters wrote about. A focus on growth has ups and downs - ups in terms of your bonus, downs because high growth firms lay people off during recessions.

Cravath is sort of the peak of being old-fashioned for NY firms. As an associate you don't have to network with anyone to get work. You are just assigned work and you do it. You also don't have a billable requirement for your bonus. Competition is "unseemly" or something like that. I personally liked that, but not everyone does. Someone mentioned earlier that an automatic DQ in the interviews is being a "prick." This is why.

There is a lot of inaccurate information in this comment. As the other poster mentioned, networking and relationships matter at Cravath, as much as it does in any other firms or any other working environment. Partners pick favorites, within their rotation/teams/deals/cases, and the favored ones get the best work and experience. Associates also fall out of favor quickly too, for whatever reason. Although you don't have a billable requirement, partners absolutely track hours and there is a pressure and reward (in terms of being favored) for billing a lot. Finally, the firm is not above competition; it is a business after all and if it wants to thrive, it has to compete.

This seems unfair since it's not a free market system and associates are assigned to specific partners who are supposed to give them the work needed for them to make the hours. What can someone who falls out of favor do about their hours? It's not like they can go work for another partner.

[Anonymous User]

I didn't get an offer, and I think it's because I made the mistake of questioning the firm's culture. I'm a business-oriented person who is interested in the tradeoffs of various business models. I was convinced that Cravath was increasingly vulnerable. I couldn't resist asking them about the weaknesses of the Cravath model (e.g. when a firm doesn't take laterals, it risks being understaffed; when a firm commits to a strict lockstep compensation, it's likely to lose rainmaker partners). I'm pretty sure I alienated the partners and lost the offer as a result.

So upshot: drink the kool-aid.

This seems less "drinking the kool-aid," more behaving like a normal person in an interview setting. Callbacks aren't exactly the ideal time to interrogate partners about the "weaknesses" of their business model. I'm pretty sure Cravath partners are not uniquely hostile to advice on running their firm, during an interview, from a law student who's never actually practiced (no matter how "business-oriented").

(For the record, I received and declined a Cravath offer, and agree they seemed to have a weird and unappealing culture.)

Do you mind elaborating on what interviewing with them was like - particularly at the callback stage - and what was exactly weird about them? I'm kind of curious if you need to prep differently for interviews with super "elite" firms like Cravath. I think I'm an average interviewer (e.g., for my finance-related work before law school, for law school applications, and for a 1L summer job at V100 firm in a secondary market) and tend to be more casual/conversational, I guess. It's worked out thus far, but I'm wondering if you really have "bring your A-game" to firms like Cravath and be super polished/preppy/etc. -- or if it's the same as interviewing for anywhere else! Ratchet state-school me would appreciate any advice!

In my experience, the partners at Cravath press the "why this firm?" question harder than some others. They want to see that you have some knowledge about firm and that you are willing to buy into the culture / distinctive approach. Just read everything on their website and peruse these forums to learn about what makes Cravath special.

That said, one should probably do that for every callback, so its probably not that different from any other interview!

[Anonymous User]

In my experience, the partners at Cravath press the "why this firm?" question harder than some others. They want to see that you have some knowledge about firm and that you are willing to buy into the culture / distinctive approach. Just read everything on their website and peruse these forums to learn about what makes Cravath special.

[Anonymous User]

I summered at CSM. Yes, for both lit and corporate, I think you can compare CSM to the other more old-school NY firms like DPW and S&C. Yes, the name prestige is silly, but it doesn't hurt to have either.

The one thing I would caution you about is that the old school ny firms have a somewhat different culture and working environment than big national firms like Latham and Kirkland. The big national firms have a more competitive internal system and a bigger focus on growth, hence the departures for Kirkland other posters wrote about. A focus on growth has ups and downs - ups in terms of your bonus, downs because high growth firms lay people off during recessions.

Cravath is sort of the peak of being old-fashioned for NY firms. As an associate you don't have to network with anyone to get work. You are just assigned work and you do it. You also don't have a billable requirement for your bonus. Competition is "unseemly" or something like that. I personally liked that, but not everyone does. Someone mentioned earlier that an automatic DQ in the interviews is being a "prick." This is why.

There is a lot of inaccurate information in this comment. As the other poster mentioned, networking and relationships matter at Cravath, as much as it does in any other firms or any other working environment. Partners pick favorites, within their rotation/teams/deals/cases, and the favored ones get the best work and experience. Associates also fall out of favor quickly too, for whatever reason. Although you don't have a billable requirement, partners absolutely track hours and there is a pressure and reward (in terms of being favored) for billing a lot. Finally, the firm is not above competition; it is a business after all and if it wants to thrive, it has to compete.

Sure people play favorites, and if you want to advance, get the best work, and make partner you obviously need to network. But you are not *required* to network there as an associate, and you are not *required* to bill a certain number of hours to get a bonus.