Columbia Law WIP/EIP Jan 2021 Forum

[Anonymous User]

Is anyone starting to panic with no job offers?

I mass mailed secondary markets I have any ties to, I applied through firms’ online portals, did WIP, got 8 callbacks, and still haven’t heard back from a single firm. 3.4GPA and thought I was safe to find at least some form of big law, but I’m thinking about looking for judicial internships now..

Definitely a tough cycle; I was rejected from all the less grade-sensitive NYC offices which I thought I had a shot, such as Ropes. I had a 3.6 GPA (not stellar but still decent); maybe this has to do with my non-citizen status.

Same. I'm thinking it was because I didn't have very specific "why this firm" spiels or interview questions prepared, so maybe it seemed like I was using the firms as backups and wasn't very interested. Still a shock to go in with a 3.6+, bid almost entirely NYC, and almost strike out.

This is definitely why. You can't go into a job interview without being able to articulate why you even want the job in the first place. You also always need to have questions. Some interviews will be you asking more questions than they will be asking you.

Yep. I thought it was better to veer on the overly general rather than overly specific, out of fear of sounding weirdly gunnerish or putting my interviewer on the spot with a question - This was a HUGE mistake. FYI to 1Ls. (I was 3.6x after 1L as well.)

You don't need very specific "why XYZ firm answers" that involve in depth research into deals or your interviewer's life story. You just need good answers to the basics: Why this city, what practice groups are you interested in, and why whatever assignment system/summer program system appeals to you. Unless you are asking something very odd, you aren't going to put your interviewer on the spot.

The best interviews are natural conversations about the work you've done in law school or before law school and the work done at the firm. They aren't interrogations nor are they filled with non-sequiters about totally random things, as that usually means the interviewer has lost interest and made a decision already.

Yeah, but you definitely need a solid amount of talking points about work the firm has done that won't also apply to another firm you talk to. I came in thinking having a solid narrative for myself, with a general understanding of practice areas, Vault rankings, and assignment systems was enough - From my experience at least, it definitely wasn't. Could have been something totally different, but from talking to career services & people on here, I think overly general answers were the most likely culprit. I've seen speculation that this year, specific answers were more important than in previous years. But I'd really advise 1Ls to make sure they are able to be specific and sell the firm that they are interested in *their firm* in particular.

I go to another school, and was pretty successful in getting offers and never really had solid talking points about the work beyond what I could find out from 5-10min of searching online. My roommate on the other hand spent hours doing research on firms before all of their callbacks and only ended up with 2 offers. They have much better grades than me, but I think I'm a better conversationalist. Anecdotal sure, but I think the previous anon's response about just having good answers for the basics and then being able to hold a conversation is more the way to go.

[Anonymous User]

I go to another school, and was pretty successful in getting offers and never really had solid talking points about the work beyond what I could find out from 5-10min of searching online. My roommate on the other hand spent hours doing research on firms before all of their callbacks and only ended up with 2 offers. They have much better grades than me, but I think I'm a better conversationalist. Anecdotal sure, but I think the previous anon's response about just having good answers for the basics and then being able to hold a conversation is more the way to go.

That's fair. I don't personally know what happened for me, so it could have been a variety of factors with some randomness. But it was a definite shock. I'd really advise 1Ls to veer on the more specific to be safe (aka not do what I did). Being able to hold a conversation isn't the most helpful advice, because all but the most socially awkward make a genuine effort to do that and no one can change their entire personality in preparation for OCI.

Also, go to recruitment events. Might have been a total coincidence, but there was an almost one-to-one correspondence between firms whose recruitment events I attended and callbacks received.

ETA: I'll also add that most of my screeners were totally fine as generic friendly "conversations" and many didn't result in CBs. Definitely practice this, but I think approaching OCI as "just show that you can hold a conversation" is not the best advice, at least for this cycle. (Especially for those of us who are KJD or close to it.) As the poster below said, get specific about your narrative and why specific work a firm is doing interests you.

[Anonymous User]

I go to another school, and was pretty successful in getting offers and never really had solid talking points about the work beyond what I could find out from 5-10min of searching online. My roommate on the other hand spent hours doing research on firms before all of their callbacks and only ended up with 2 offers. They have much better grades than me, but I think I'm a better conversationalist. Anecdotal sure, but I think the previous anon's response about just having good answers for the basics and then being able to hold a conversation is more the way to go.

That's fair. I don't personally know what happened for me, so it could have been a variety of factors with some randomness. But it was a definite shock. I'd really advise 1Ls to veer on the more specific to be safe (aka not do what I did). Being able to hold a conversation isn't the most helpful advice, because all but the most socially awkward make a genuine effort to do that and no one can change their entire personality in preparation for OCI.

Also, go to recruitment events. Might have been a total coincidence, but there was an almost one-to-one correspondence between firms whose recruitment events I attended and callbacks received.

You can practice conversations. People don't wake up one morning with dynamite charisma---it's a skill. Do practice interviews. Keep doing them. Film yourself doing them so you can see if you have odd ticks or weird gestures. Go out with friends and practice active listening. Go on dates and do the same thing.

Going to recruiting events is another great way to practice being able to hold a conversation. 1Ls have plenty of time to try becoming an interesting person, which is what firms are really looking for.

[Anonymous User]

I go to another school, and was pretty successful in getting offers and never really had solid talking points about the work beyond what I could find out from 5-10min of searching online. My roommate on the other hand spent hours doing research on firms before all of their callbacks and only ended up with 2 offers. They have much better grades than me, but I think I'm a better conversationalist. Anecdotal sure, but I think the previous anon's response about just having good answers for the basics and then being able to hold a conversation is more the way to go.

IMO, for the 1Ls lurking here, this is the right answer. Firms are looking for people that are: (a) hardworking and smart (as evidenced by grades) and (b) someone who can be left in a room with a client without need for supervision/assistance. Definitely not saying you have to be super sociable / suave / chatty (in fact, taken to extremes, those things would be bad). But there's something beyond mere conversational competence that is required.

To give a quick example, compare two responses to the question "tell me about yourself":
• Response #1: I studied X at Y undergrad. After graduating Y, I went to job Z, where I worked on ABC type of project, which was great. After job Z, I applied to law school, where I've since focused on DEF subject.
• Response #2: You'll see from my resume that I've taken a somewhat winding path to law school. I came out of undergrad having studied X, but felt that learning Z would pay dividends over the course of my career. So I went to job ABC to build a foundation in Z, but fell in love with DEF, which ended up being the catalyst for me going to law school. I actually saw on the firm website that your practice involves DEF, so I'd love to discuss that with you later. And despite all the scary things I heard about law school before applying, I've loved it -- what's surprised me most about the experience is GHI feature of the curriculum...

Response #2 is superior in interviews to #1 (I say this as somebody who's been chastised for being monosyllabic and whose tendencies are much closer to #1). Obviously, though, this can be taken too far and there's a point at which your response becomes annoyingly smarmy or circuitous. But inserting framing and narrative arc into each response, making sure that you give your interviewer enough fodder to springboard into the next question, etc., is important and paid off for me during interviews.

[Anonymous User]

Is anyone starting to panic with no job offers?

I mass mailed secondary markets I have any ties to, I applied through firms’ online portals, did WIP, got 8 callbacks, and still haven’t heard back from a single firm. 3.4GPA and thought I was safe to find at least some form of big law, but I’m thinking about looking for judicial internships now..

Definitely a tough cycle; I was rejected from all the less grade-sensitive NYC offices which I thought I had a shot, such as Ropes. I had a 3.6 GPA (not stellar but still decent); maybe this has to do with my non-citizen status.

Same. I'm thinking it was because I didn't have very specific "why this firm" spiels or interview questions prepared, so maybe it seemed like I was using the firms as backups and wasn't very interested. Still a shock to go in with a 3.6+, bid almost entirely NYC, and almost strike out.

This is definitely why. You can't go into a job interview without being able to articulate why you even want the job in the first place. You also always need to have questions. Some interviews will be you asking more questions than they will be asking you.

Yep. I thought it was better to veer on the overly general rather than overly specific, out of fear of sounding weirdly gunnerish or putting my interviewer on the spot with a question - This was a HUGE mistake. FYI to 1Ls. (I was 3.6x after 1L as well.)

You don't need very specific "why XYZ firm answers" that involve in depth research into deals or your interviewer's life story. You just need good answers to the basics: Why this city, what practice groups are you interested in, and why whatever assignment system/summer program system appeals to you. Unless you are asking something very odd, you aren't going to put your interviewer on the spot.

The best interviews are natural conversations about the work you've done in law school or before law school and the work done at the firm. They aren't interrogations nor are they filled with non-sequiters about totally random things, as that usually means the interviewer has lost interest and made a decision already.

Yeah, but you definitely need a solid amount of talking points about work the firm has done that won't also apply to another firm you talk to. I came in thinking having a solid narrative for myself, with a general understanding of practice areas, Vault rankings, and assignment systems was enough - From my experience at least, it definitely wasn't. Could have been something totally different, but from talking to career services & people on here, I think overly general answers were the most likely culprit. I've seen speculation that this year, specific answers were more important than in previous years. But I'd really advise 1Ls to make sure they are able to be specific and sell the firm that they are interested in *their firm* in particular.

I’m a mid at a V10 doing these interviews and I would say that the best answers to “Why X firm?” usually involved the candidate mentioning that they actually spoke with current/former associates (including 3Ls who summered) at the firm and that such associates mentioned Y which was really attractive to the candidate.It gives a bit more substance to the BS. Giving generic answers like “the culture” or “dedication to pro bono” was a turn off (and god forbid you say the word “collegiality”).

[Anonymous User]

Definitely a tough cycle; I was rejected from all the less grade-sensitive NYC offices which I thought I had a shot, such as Ropes. I had a 3.6 GPA (not stellar but still decent); maybe this has to do with my non-citizen status.

Same. I'm thinking it was because I didn't have very specific "why this firm" spiels or interview questions prepared, so maybe it seemed like I was using the firms as backups and wasn't very interested. Still a shock to go in with a 3.6+, bid almost entirely NYC, and almost strike out.

This is definitely why. You can't go into a job interview without being able to articulate why you even want the job in the first place. You also always need to have questions. Some interviews will be you asking more questions than they will be asking you.

Yep. I thought it was better to veer on the overly general rather than overly specific, out of fear of sounding weirdly gunnerish or putting my interviewer on the spot with a question - This was a HUGE mistake. FYI to 1Ls. (I was 3.6x after 1L as well.)

You don't need very specific "why XYZ firm answers" that involve in depth research into deals or your interviewer's life story. You just need good answers to the basics: Why this city, what practice groups are you interested in, and why whatever assignment system/summer program system appeals to you. Unless you are asking something very odd, you aren't going to put your interviewer on the spot.

The best interviews are natural conversations about the work you've done in law school or before law school and the work done at the firm. They aren't interrogations nor are they filled with non-sequiters about totally random things, as that usually means the interviewer has lost interest and made a decision already.

Yeah, but you definitely need a solid amount of talking points about work the firm has done that won't also apply to another firm you talk to. I came in thinking having a solid narrative for myself, with a general understanding of practice areas, Vault rankings, and assignment systems was enough - From my experience at least, it definitely wasn't. Could have been something totally different, but from talking to career services & people on here, I think overly general answers were the most likely culprit. I've seen speculation that this year, specific answers were more important than in previous years. But I'd really advise 1Ls to make sure they are able to be specific and sell the firm that they are interested in *their firm* in particular.

I’m a mid at a V10 doing these interviews and I would say that the best answers to “Why X firm?” usually involved the candidate mentioning that they actually spoke with current/former associates (including 3Ls who summered) at the firm and that such associates mentioned Y which was really attractive to the candidate.It gives a bit more substance to the BS. Giving generic answers like “the culture” or “dedication to pro bono” was a turn off (and god forbid you say the word “collegiality”).

Why would you ever mention pro bono in an interview? You're paid to work for paying clients, not "do good" for the world. Pro Bono is something to worry about when you have options.

[Anonymous User]

Adding to the "Why firm X?" responses, I definitely had two or three specific talking points. Contra the above poster, I did occasionally mention collegiality, but it was tethered either to conversations I had had, specific firm policies (e.g. lockstep compensation), or statements made by the interviewers themselves.

Something that I found effective in navigating OCI and getting a lot of callbacks: Winnow down options pre-OCI. Do you have a practice area you want to specialize in? No? Immediately knock off all firms that require immediate specialization. You also have an answer to the above question: "I am not sure what I want to specialize in, so I am looking for a firm that allows its associates to explore different types of cases and areas of law." You should not just be bidding firms at random. There are enough firms that you should be bidding firms that check off really basic boxes--lit v. transactional, location, specialization, etc. If you are not sure transactional or lit, bid firms that have strong programs in both.

The process becomes much easier when you do not have to invent completely BS responses to questions. Also, unless you have transactional experience, express openness to trying it.

[Anonymous User]

Adding to the "Why firm X?" responses, I definitely had two or three specific talking points. Contra the above poster, I did occasionally mention collegiality, but it was tethered either to conversations I had had, specific firm policies (e.g. lockstep compensation), or statements made by the interviewers themselves.

Something that I found effective in navigating OCI and getting a lot of callbacks: Winnow down options pre-OCI. Do you have a practice area you want to specialize in? Immediately knock off all firms that require immediate specialization. You also have an answer to the above question: "I am not sure what I want to specialize in, so I am looking for a firm that allows its associates to explore different types of cases and areas of law." You should not just be bidding firms at random. There are enough firms that you should be bidding firms that check off really basic boxes--lit v. transactional, location, specialization, etc. If you are not sure transactional or lit, bid firms that have strong programs in both.

The process becomes much easier when you do not have to invent completely BS responses to questions. Also, unless you have transactional experience, express openness to trying it.

I echo the openness to transactional experience point. Firms are cutting litigation headcount across the board and if you express that you would only ever do litigation, it makes it extremely difficult to give you the offer (or the callback). We’ve had to reject 3.7-3.8~ candidates from HYSCCN at the screener stage because we already have candidates with 3.9-4.0s and we’re filled up on the litigation slots.

[Anonymous User]

There’s a sweet spot for “why firm X?” between a non-answer like ‘collegiality’ and something that is hyper-specific. I think the downside of hyper-specific is that there’s some false precision there, and you run the risk of either mis-stating some nuance of the firm or latching on to some aspect of the firm that seems important to you but that your interviewer regards as not important. In general, you’re goal with these interviews is to mirror back an impression that matches how the firm sees itself, and saying something hyper-specific increases the likelihood that you won’t match up.

In general, don’t overthink or get to fancy with “why firm X?” You don’t have to reinvent the wheel! E.g., if you’re interviewing at Cravath, tell them why you like the rotation system (which is the generic response) plus equally important, substantiate that with some prior experience (WE, etc.) demonstrating why rotating like that is a good fit for you.

[Anonymous User]

You can practice conversations. People don't wake up one morning with dynamite charisma---it's a skill. Do practice interviews. Keep doing them. Film yourself doing them so you can see if you have odd ticks or weird gestures. Go out with friends and practice active listening. Go on dates and do the same thing.

Going to recruiting events is another great way to practice being able to hold a conversation. 1Ls have plenty of time to try becoming an interesting person, which is what firms are really looking for.

This is funny.

If you're a 1L hoping to play it safe, don't go into OCI doing five minutes of firm research and trying to woo your interviewers with the "dynamite charisma" you developed by going on thirty Tinder dates and going out with friends to do "active listening" in the middle of a pandemic. Unless you're exceptionally awkward, spend that time researching firms, networking, putting together your narrative, and doing practice interviews. Most law students have average-ish conversational abilities, so the "stand out by knowing how to hold a conversation" advice isn't helpful.

[Anonymous User]

You can practice conversations. People don't wake up one morning with dynamite charisma---it's a skill. Do practice interviews. Keep doing them. Film yourself doing them so you can see if you have odd ticks or weird gestures. Go out with friends and practice active listening. Go on dates and do the same thing.

Going to recruiting events is another great way to practice being able to hold a conversation. 1Ls have plenty of time to try becoming an interesting person, which is what firms are really looking for.

This is funny.

If you're a 1L hoping to play it safe, don't go into OCI doing five minutes of firm research and trying to woo your interviewers with the "dynamite charisma" you developed by going on thirty Tinder dates and going out with friends to do "active listening" in the middle of a pandemic. Unless you're exceptionally awkward, spend that time researching firms, networking, putting together your narrative, and doing practice interviews. Most law students have average-ish conversational abilities, so the "stand out by knowing how to hold a conversation" advice isn't helpful.

All that time networking and researching the firm isn't going to do a thing for you if you can't hold a conservation for 20 min and sound like an awful person to be stuck doing work with in a conference room at 3AM in the morning. 1Ls have plenty of time to figure out Cravath has a rotation system and also how to come across as a confident person a partner feels comfortable presenting to clients.

[Anonymous User]

Adding to the "Why firm X?" responses, I definitely had two or three specific talking points. Contra the above poster, I did occasionally mention collegiality, but it was tethered either to conversations I had had, specific firm policies (e.g. lockstep compensation), or statements made by the interviewers themselves.

Something that I found effective in navigating OCI and getting a lot of callbacks: Winnow down options pre-OCI. Do you have a practice area you want to specialize in? Immediately knock off all firms that require immediate specialization. You also have an answer to the above question: "I am not sure what I want to specialize in, so I am looking for a firm that allows its associates to explore different types of cases and areas of law." You should not just be bidding firms at random. There are enough firms that you should be bidding firms that check off really basic boxes--lit v. transactional, location, specialization, etc. If you are not sure transactional or lit, bid firms that have strong programs in both.

The process becomes much easier when you do not have to invent completely BS responses to questions. Also, unless you have transactional experience, express openness to trying it.

I echo the openness to transactional experience point. Firms are cutting litigation headcount across the board and if you express that you would only ever do litigation, it makes it extremely difficult to give you the offer (or the callback). We’ve had to reject 3.7-3.8~ candidates from HYSCCN at the screener stage because we already have candidates with 3.9-4.0s and we’re filled up on the litigation slots.

Yeah this is so true. I'm a Kent at CLS who went super hard into lit and a v5 partner who gave me an offer told me it's the hardest year in litigation he's seen since 2010. OCS always say lit is slightly more selective but I think the gap is widening significantly.

[Anonymous User]

You can practice conversations. People don't wake up one morning with dynamite charisma---it's a skill. Do practice interviews. Keep doing them. Film yourself doing them so you can see if you have odd ticks or weird gestures. Go out with friends and practice active listening. Go on dates and do the same thing.

Going to recruiting events is another great way to practice being able to hold a conversation. 1Ls have plenty of time to try becoming an interesting person, which is what firms are really looking for.

This is funny.

If you're a 1L hoping to play it safe, don't go into OCI doing five minutes of firm research and trying to woo your interviewers with the "dynamite charisma" you developed by going on thirty Tinder dates and going out with friends to do "active listening" in the middle of a pandemic. Unless you're exceptionally awkward, spend that time researching firms, networking, putting together your narrative, and doing practice interviews. Most law students have average-ish conversational abilities, so the "stand out by knowing how to hold a conversation" advice isn't helpful.

All that time networking and researching the firm isn't going to do a thing for you if you can't hold a conservation for 20 min and sound like an awful person to be stuck doing work with in a conference room at 3AM in the morning. 1Ls have plenty of time to figure out Cravath has a rotation system and also how to come across as a confident person a partner feels comfortable presenting to clients.

Definitely. But the vast majority of 1Ls already know how to do that and aren't going to stand out positively because they can hold a 20 minute conversation. Happy for the person who slayed OCI after doing 5-10 minutes of firm research in prep for callbacks because of their fantastic conversational skills, but that's just not great advice for most 1Ls.

[Anonymous User]

You can practice conversations. People don't wake up one morning with dynamite charisma---it's a skill. Do practice interviews. Keep doing them. Film yourself doing them so you can see if you have odd ticks or weird gestures. Go out with friends and practice active listening. Go on dates and do the same thing.

Going to recruiting events is another great way to practice being able to hold a conversation. 1Ls have plenty of time to try becoming an interesting person, which is what firms are really looking for.

This is funny.

If you're a 1L hoping to play it safe, don't go into OCI doing five minutes of firm research and trying to woo your interviewers with the "dynamite charisma" you developed by going on thirty Tinder dates and going out with friends to do "active listening" in the middle of a pandemic. Unless you're exceptionally awkward, spend that time researching firms, networking, putting together your narrative, and doing practice interviews. Most law students have average-ish conversational abilities, so the "stand out by knowing how to hold a conversation" advice isn't helpful.

All that time networking and researching the firm isn't going to do a thing for you if you can't hold a conservation for 20 min and sound like an awful person to be stuck doing work with in a conference room at 3AM in the morning. 1Ls have plenty of time to figure out Cravath has a rotation system and also how to come across as a confident person a partner feels comfortable presenting to clients.

Definitely. But the vast majority of 1Ls already know how to do that and aren't going to stand out positively because they can hold a 20 minute conversation. Happy for the person who slayed OCI after doing 5-10 minutes of firm research in prep for callbacks because of their fantastic conversational skills, but that's just not great advice for most 1Ls.

I think you're vastly overestimating the conversational skills of most CLS students. I've met plenty of people that are nice and easy to talk to in normal life, but when helping them with interviews, they're absolutely horrible. It might actually be more difficult this year, but I still think working on improving your conversational skills and interview skills is more important than regurgitating information about a firm.

[Anonymous User]

You can practice conversations. People don't wake up one morning with dynamite charisma---it's a skill. Do practice interviews. Keep doing them. Film yourself doing them so you can see if you have odd ticks or weird gestures. Go out with friends and practice active listening. Go on dates and do the same thing.

Going to recruiting events is another great way to practice being able to hold a conversation. 1Ls have plenty of time to try becoming an interesting person, which is what firms are really looking for.

This is funny.

If you're a 1L hoping to play it safe, don't go into OCI doing five minutes of firm research and trying to woo your interviewers with the "dynamite charisma" you developed by going on thirty Tinder dates and going out with friends to do "active listening" in the middle of a pandemic. Unless you're exceptionally awkward, spend that time researching firms, networking, putting together your narrative, and doing practice interviews. Most law students have average-ish conversational abilities, so the "stand out by knowing how to hold a conversation" advice isn't helpful.

All that time networking and researching the firm isn't going to do a thing for you if you can't hold a conservation for 20 min and sound like an awful person to be stuck doing work with in a conference room at 3AM in the morning. 1Ls have plenty of time to figure out Cravath has a rotation system and also how to come across as a confident person a partner feels comfortable presenting to clients.

Definitely. But the vast majority of 1Ls already know how to do that and aren't going to stand out positively because they can hold a 20 minute conversation. Happy for the person who slayed OCI after doing 5-10 minutes of firm research in prep for callbacks because of their fantastic conversational skills, but that's just not great advice for most 1Ls.

I actually think a lot of law students don't know how to do that in an interview. Sure, you can hold a conversation normally in a group of friends, but I know a lot of people who get super nervous in an interview or who think the less is more approach is better and don't give a lot of depth in their answers for fear of slipping something in that might turn off the interviewer, or they endlessly ramble. The amount of times I've heard my friends say that they didn't really have time to ask the interviewer questions is a lot, and in my opinion would be a big red flag.
My advice would be to just talk more with attorneys. Go to firm receptions, ask to do coffees with attorneys, and do as many mock interviews as you can (and if you can find a practicing attorney that's willing to maybe do a short mock interview even better). I think the more you talk with attorneys you pick up on what gets them talking more and what doesn't, you learn how to talk about a firm from how they talk about a firm, and I think you just get really comfortable with having conversations with attorneys and know when to turn a question around to the interviewer, or where you should talk a bit more in an answer and when should you get less. Networking with attorneys at firms you want to work at is great, but just talking with whoever I think gives you tools for any interviewer. I'm not saying I'm some fantastic candidate, but I think a lot of people really overestimate how great they are at holding a conversation in an interview

[Anonymous User]

You can practice conversations. People don't wake up one morning with dynamite charisma---it's a skill. Do practice interviews. Keep doing them. Film yourself doing them so you can see if you have odd ticks or weird gestures. Go out with friends and practice active listening. Go on dates and do the same thing.

Going to recruiting events is another great way to practice being able to hold a conversation. 1Ls have plenty of time to try becoming an interesting person, which is what firms are really looking for.

This is funny.

If you're a 1L hoping to play it safe, don't go into OCI doing five minutes of firm research and trying to woo your interviewers with the "dynamite charisma" you developed by going on thirty Tinder dates and going out with friends to do "active listening" in the middle of a pandemic. Unless you're exceptionally awkward, spend that time researching firms, networking, putting together your narrative, and doing practice interviews. Most law students have average-ish conversational abilities, so the "stand out by knowing how to hold a conversation" advice isn't helpful.

All that time networking and researching the firm isn't going to do a thing for you if you can't hold a conservation for 20 min and sound like an awful person to be stuck doing work with in a conference room at 3AM in the morning. 1Ls have plenty of time to figure out Cravath has a rotation system and also how to come across as a confident person a partner feels comfortable presenting to clients.

Definitely. But the vast majority of 1Ls already know how to do that and aren't going to stand out positively because they can hold a 20 minute conversation. Happy for the person who slayed OCI after doing 5-10 minutes of firm research in prep for callbacks because of their fantastic conversational skills, but that's just not great advice for most 1Ls.

CLS students are not nearly as good conversationalists as you imagine. Attending 1 firm reception would fully disabuse you of this notion.

[Anonymous User]

You can practice conversations. People don't wake up one morning with dynamite charisma---it's a skill. Do practice interviews. Keep doing them. Film yourself doing them so you can see if you have odd ticks or weird gestures. Go out with friends and practice active listening. Go on dates and do the same thing.

Going to recruiting events is another great way to practice being able to hold a conversation. 1Ls have plenty of time to try becoming an interesting person, which is what firms are really looking for.

This is funny.

If you're a 1L hoping to play it safe, don't go into OCI doing five minutes of firm research and trying to woo your interviewers with the "dynamite charisma" you developed by going on thirty Tinder dates and going out with friends to do "active listening" in the middle of a pandemic. Unless you're exceptionally awkward, spend that time researching firms, networking, putting together your narrative, and doing practice interviews. Most law students have average-ish conversational abilities, so the "stand out by knowing how to hold a conversation" advice isn't helpful.

All that time networking and researching the firm isn't going to do a thing for you if you can't hold a conservation for 20 min and sound like an awful person to be stuck doing work with in a conference room at 3AM in the morning. 1Ls have plenty of time to figure out Cravath has a rotation system and also how to come across as a confident person a partner feels comfortable presenting to clients.

Definitely. But the vast majority of 1Ls already know how to do that and aren't going to stand out positively because they can hold a 20 minute conversation. Happy for the person who slayed OCI after doing 5-10 minutes of firm research in prep for callbacks because of their fantastic conversational skills, but that's just not great advice for most 1Ls.

I actually think a lot of law students don't know how to do that in an interview. Sure, you can hold a conversation normally in a group of friends, but I know a lot of people who get super nervous in an interview or who think the less is more approach is better and don't give a lot of depth in their answers for fear of slipping something in that might turn off the interviewer, or they endlessly ramble. The amount of times I've heard my friends say that they didn't really have time to ask the interviewer questions is a lot, and in my opinion would be a big red flag.
My advice would be to just talk more with attorneys. Go to firm receptions, ask to do coffees with attorneys, and do as many mock interviews as you can (and if you can find a practicing attorney that's willing to maybe do a short mock interview even better). I think the more you talk with attorneys you pick up on what gets them talking more and what doesn't, you learn how to talk about a firm from how they talk about a firm, and I think you just get really comfortable with having conversations with attorneys and know when to turn a question around to the interviewer, or where you should talk a bit more in an answer and when should you get less. Networking with attorneys at firms you want to work at is great, but just talking with whoever I think gives you tools for any interviewer. I'm not saying I'm some fantastic candidate, but I think a lot of people really overestimate how great they are at holding a conversation in an interview

This is good advice and I 100% agree. It was just the specific advice above to "go on dates" and "go out with friends" that was jarring/condescending - Most 1Ls need practice having professional conversations with attorneys about their work, like you say, not learning basic social skills from Tinder dates. And, even then, you probably don't want to walk into OCI relying on charisma alone.

[Anonymous User]

Did anyone apply to Morgan Lewis LA after the CalSoc email?

Also curious to hear updates on SoCal callbacks anyone has had recently or post-WIP. A lot of firms apparently have been waiting for offerees to release their offers and may still have space left.

[Anonymous User]

Is anyone starting to panic with no job offers?

I mass mailed secondary markets I have any ties to, I applied through firms’ online portals, did WIP, got 8 callbacks, and still haven’t heard back from a single firm. 3.4GPA and thought I was safe to find at least some form of big law, but I’m thinking about looking for judicial internships now..

got 7 cbs and struck out. The pain is real.

Sorry to hear this! Are the CBs all for big NYC firms? When is it too late to wait?

6 NYC, 1 secondary market. I think if it is an offer, they will call you in like a day or two.

[Anonymous User]

Did anyone apply to Morgan Lewis LA after the CalSoc email?

Also curious to hear updates on SoCal callbacks anyone has had recently or post-WIP. A lot of firms apparently have been waiting for offerees to release their offers and may still have space left.

i applied. Heard nothing.