University of Chicago 2010 OCI - callbacks Forum

[dresden doll]

Thank you, USAIRS, for one of the very few substantive posts ITT.

[rynabrius]

Preparing well for an interview > personality, in my opinion. Anyway, I am tired of hearing people talk about personality. It's so nebulous. I'd like to do a study where we have a group of partners/associates watch an interview via cctv, and rate the interviewer's personality without knowing their grades. Then, look at the grades, work experience, and other factors, and do a regression to see what the statistically significant predictors of callbacks are. (It would be even better if we found a way to disentangle interview preparedness from personality, so maybe we could also rate general personality outside the interview context.)

I suspect that 'personality' as a general thing wouldn't be a statistically significant driver of callbacks. If significant, the effect size would be small.

Life really is as simple as it looks. Partners say things about looking for "good fits" because it is the PC thing to say -- it signals that they are good people. I'm more interested in what they do than what they say.

[dresden doll]

Anyway, I am tired of hearing people talk about personality. It's so nebulous.

Plus a million.

[USAIRS]

Preparing well for an interview > personality, in my opinion...

Life really is as simple as it looks. Partners say things about looking for "good fits" because it is the PC thing to say -- it signals that they are good people.

Interviewers, when they aren't just fancy resume' receptacles, aren't always good at what they do. They don't know how to articulate what they are looking for, and they don't always ask questions that elicit it from candidates. "Personality" or "fit" are ways of framing a candidate's confidence, appearance of competence, physical presence, interest, and articulation. These are things that can come with preparation and practice. I've been able to transform some nightmarishly bad interviewers into pretty good ones.

ETA: Thanks for the compliment Dresden. I try not to post much unless it is something compelling. I feel that I'm either too late, or the people that need advice aren't here anyway, so I'll leave it to you to slap around Maroons who need it.

[Anonymous User]

Preparing well for an interview > personality, in my opinion. Anyway, I am tired of hearing people talk about personality. It's so nebulous. I'd like to do a study where we have a group of partners/associates watch an interview via cctv, and rate the interviewer's personality without knowing their grades. Then, look at the grades, work experience, and other factors, and do a regression to see what the statistically significant predictors of callbacks are. (It would be even better if we found a way to disentangle interview preparedness from personality, so maybe we could also rate general personality outside the interview context.)

I suspect that 'personality' as a general thing wouldn't be a statistically significant driver of callbacks. If significant, the effect size would be small.

Life really is as simple as it looks. Partners say things about looking for "good fits" because it is the PC thing to say -- it signals that they are good people. I'm more interested in what they do than what they say.

You can prepare well for an interview, but if you can't deliver your talking points well you won't be in good shape. Preparation is key, but at the end of the day you're graded on the style & substance of your delivery.

In any case, whatever you call it, I think the key takeaway is that grades are not determinative except at the extreme of a firm's target range.

[USAIRS]

You can prepare well for an interview, but if you can't deliver your talking points well you won't be in good shape. Preparation is key, but at the end of the day you're graded on the style & substance of your delivery.

In any case, whatever you call it, I think the key takeaway is that grades are not determinative except at the extreme of a firm's target range.

Last thing: YOU DON'T NEED TO BE ANONYMOUS to post this. If you are going to dole it out, at least make yourself available via PM to people who actually want to ask you about how to improve their interview skills? Maybe you'll actually end up helping out a Chicago bro/sis instead of just being a critical voice on the internet.

Delivery can be practiced - that's why you should go through timed practice interviews over and over.

[Anonymous User]

Latham (LA) ding via snail mal

[Anonymous User]

You can prepare well for an interview, but if you can't deliver your talking points well you won't be in good shape. Preparation is key, but at the end of the day you're graded on the style & substance of your delivery.

In any case, whatever you call it, I think the key takeaway is that grades are not determinative except at the extreme of a firm's target range.

Last thing: YOU DON'T NEED TO BE ANONYMOUS to post this. If you are going to dole it out, at least make yourself available via PM to people who actually want to ask you about how to improve their interview skills? Maybe you'll actually end up helping out a Chicago bro/sis instead of just being a critical voice on the internet.

Delivery can be practiced - that's why you should go through timed practice interviews over and over.

First, I can't post with my handle because people know it in real life and that makes it hard to be frank.

Second, I'm not trying to be critical, I'm trying to be helpful. I want people who have CBs and screeners left to get out of the mindset that grades are outcome determinative. I know classmates who thought that as long as they bid safely, low-V100 firms would love to have their top X% GPA. They were sociable and pleasant, but frankly indistinguishable from all their peers that might have had a top (X+e)% GPA.

You should go into each interview with the intention of making the interviewer run to the hiring partner and saying: "we gotta hire this guy/girl!"

Confidence, presence, maturity, etc, are all part of creating that impression. I don't even think preparation is that important. All you need is 2-3 key facts about each firm. It's much more important how you use those facts.

I did about 40 screening interviews total (between OCI and job fairs) and after the first half of them, I stopped doing anything more than just glancing at Chambers and the interviewer's bio. Very few people are impressed by your digging through the firm's website to find some tidbit of information. Most people are impressed by your being able to convey eloquently and convincingly that your interests line up with the firm's work.

Many of my classmates are treating this process as something that "happens to them" instead of treating it as an opportunity to aggressively market themselves into the job they want. I want them to get the jobs they want, hence my ramblings ITT.

[dresden doll]

ETA: Thanks for the compliment Dresden. I try not to post much unless it is something compelling. I feel that I'm either too late, or the people that need advice aren't here anyway, so I'll leave it to you to slap around Maroons who need it.

Sadly, I probably need just as much slapping around as my fellow Maroons.

[Anonymous User]

+1 on making our school look terrible. Some maturity, please.

[rynabrius]

Preparation encompasses delivery, it is not limited to learning info about firms.

[applecore]

This whole discussion is pointless. The people raving "personality matters" all think they're Maverick. The people raving "grades matter" are bitter about their grades. The people saying "both matter" are as useless and vague as Paul Woo. And EVERYONE is re-hashing and over-analyzing a process that already happened.

The only people who are contributing helpful info to this thread are those posting their callbacks and dings w/ firm names.

[USAIRS]

First, I can't post with my handle because people know it in real life and that makes it hard to be frank.

I hear ya, but if you have something to offer, it is in real life that being frank is needed most.

This is the first time I've seen OCI play out on the internet this way. To be fair, this kind of OCI nonsense happens every year at every top school. 95% of people end up getting sweet, sweet, jobs after horrible, horrible rejection. If you know who any of these ten stragglers (probably a few more momentarily) are, you should definitely reach out to them and let them know that you'd be willing to help them prep for the call back if they end up wrangling something.

Back to your dings and CBs.

[Anonymous User]

Will someone please change the name of this thread to "ITT: We trade useless banter about OCI" and start up a fresh "University of Chicago OCI - Callbacks". Thanks.

[Anonymous User]

I love UC. We're awesome and smart and ridiculously good looking.

Now back to callbacks.

Are people receiving Wildman (Chicago) dings yet? And did anybody else get a callback?

[Anonymous User]

Will someone please change the name of this thread to "ITT: We trade useless banter about OCI" and start up a fresh "University of Chicago OCI - Callbacks". Thanks.

Sorry bro, but I'm pretty sure the callback ship has sailed.

[Anonymous User]

Will someone please change the name of this thread to "ITT: We trade useless banter about OCI" and start up a fresh "University of Chicago OCI - Callbacks". Thanks.

Sorry bro, but I'm pretty sure the callback ship has sailed.

Not for Chicago firms -

[Anonymous User]

Will someone please change the name of this thread to "ITT: We trade useless banter about OCI" and start up a fresh "University of Chicago OCI - Callbacks". Thanks.

Sorry bro, but I'm pretty sure the callback ship has sailed.

Not for Chicago firms -

Really, which Chicago firms haven't made cb's yet? I know of cb's at skadden, ke, sa, mb, and eimer.

[Anonymous User]

For the strong grades, low/no CB folk:

I've had some success this week, even though it's "too late," with emailing big firms that did participate in OCI. I said sorry I missed you, emailed them a cover letter, resume and transcript, and told them when I'd be in town if they wanted to do an initial interview later this month. I figured it would only cost me an extra night or two of bumming a couch, wouldn't cost them too much to see me for an initial interview since I'd be out there anyway, and I'm legitimately interested in expanding my search in their market since my Chicago prospects are not as bright as I hoped.

I got one "sorry we're full," but I also got two immediate phone interviews and callbacks that way, and scheduled the callbacks for when I was going to be there to see other firms. Out of only six targeted emails. I won't say the firms for privacy reasons, but they are all V20 major market. If you're strong on paper and need to expand your search, it's still a possibility.

[Anonymous User]

Really, which Chicago firms haven't made cb's yet? I know of cb's at skadden, ke, sa, mb, and eimer.

Why are you writing on here?

[Anonymous User]

Really, which Chicago firms haven't made cb's yet? I know of cb's at skadden, ke, sa, mb, and eimer.

Why are you writing on here?

Why do we exist?

I'm waiting to hear from some Chicago firms, I specifically know of cb's at a few Chicago firms (not my cb's), but I was under the impression that all major Chicago firms have given cb's (though I have no solid info). So I'm writing on here to find out:

which Chicago firms haven't made cb's yet?

[Anonymous User]

To my knowledge, Sonnenschein has not done any callbacks yet.

I also don't know of anyone with a callback from Latham Chicago, interviewer DD.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the info. Sonnenschein is good news, since that's one I'm waiting on.

[Anonymous User]

Any word from Chicago Firms:
~Foley & Lardner
~Latham & Watkins
~Kirkland & Ellis R.C. & S.H.
~Paul Hastings
or
~Perkins Coie?

[Anonymous User]

Vedder Price snail mail ding p.c.