Lower T14 with median grades..what are my chances for SA job Forum

[LawIdiot86]

It's exactly as helpful as it needs to be. Firms don't care about more than approximate grade range breakdowns. My year, at lower T14 your targets for NYC were basically:

Top 5% - WLRK
Top 20% - CSM, S&C, DPW, Cleary, etc
Top 35% - PW, Skadden, K&E, Weil, Deb, etc
Top 65% - Fried Frank, Cahill, etc
Top 80% - NY offices of non-elite non-NY firms

There's no point in going into finer gradations than that, because firms don't really make such fine distinctions. The way the curve is compressed, the difference between top 40% and top 60% is probably the difference between 3.25 and 3.4 on a curve like UVA's. Firms just aren't making micro-distinctions in that range.

Also, callback data tends to be supremely unhelpful. Firms will call back all the 3.7's they can get. But their callback median will be way above the median of the people who actually accept offers.

Does work experience allow for bidding more aggressively in these tiers? For example, a couple years of public accounting between undergrad and law school. I'm hoping to sell the client service, long hours, financial statement knowledge, etc. Career services doesn't seem big on it, though.

According to others on this board, this should help you. From my personal experience as a CPA and from my two CPA friends at T14s, it hurt their odds as they were pigeonholed as only wanting tax practices and wanting to jump back to the Big 4 after the JD. In general, WE won't help at this level unless it's an MD/PhD and URM/IP will help to a much greater extent.

[booboo]

It's exactly as helpful as it needs to be. Firms don't care about more than approximate grade range breakdowns. My year, at lower T14 your targets for NYC were basically:

Top 5% - WLRK
Top 20% - CSM, S&C, DPW, Cleary, etc
Top 35% - PW, Skadden, K&E, Weil, Deb, etc
Top 65% - Fried Frank, Cahill, etc
Top 80% - NY offices of non-elite non-NY firms

There's no point in going into finer gradations than that, because firms don't really make such fine distinctions. The way the curve is compressed, the difference between top 40% and top 60% is probably the difference between 3.25 and 3.4 on a curve like UVA's. Firms just aren't making micro-distinctions in that range.

Also, callback data tends to be supremely unhelpful. Firms will call back all the 3.7's they can get. But their callback median will be way above the median of the people who actually accept offers.

Isn't N different from other lower T14 in that it places extremely well?

Also, would you be willing to do some sort of similar breakdown for CCN? Thanks! .

[LawIdiot86]

It's exactly as helpful as it needs to be. Firms don't care about more than approximate grade range breakdowns. My year, at lower T14 your targets for NYC were basically:

Top 5% - WLRK
Top 20% - CSM, S&C, DPW, Cleary, etc
Top 35% - PW, Skadden, K&E, Weil, Deb, etc
Top 65% - Fried Frank, Cahill, etc
Top 80% - NY offices of non-elite non-NY firms

There's no point in going into finer gradations than that, because firms don't really make such fine distinctions. The way the curve is compressed, the difference between top 40% and top 60% is probably the difference between 3.25 and 3.4 on a curve like UVA's. Firms just aren't making micro-distinctions in that range.

Also, callback data tends to be supremely unhelpful. Firms will call back all the 3.7's they can get. But their callback median will be way above the median of the people who actually accept offers.

Isn't N different from other lower T14 in that it places extremely well?

Also, would you be willing to do some sort of similar breakdown for CCN? Thanks! .

Depending on the year, N and C have placed better than D and G. I would suspect N to continue to place well, given it's three-market "story" vs. the two-market stories of DCG.

[Anonymous User]

It's exactly as helpful as it needs to be. Firms don't care about more than approximate grade range breakdowns. My year, at lower T14 your targets for NYC were basically:

Top 5% - WLRK
Top 20% - CSM, S&C, DPW, Cleary, etc
Top 35% - PW, Skadden, K&E, Weil, Deb, etc
Top 65% - Fried Frank, Cahill, etc
Top 80% - NY offices of non-elite non-NY firms

There's no point in going into finer gradations than that, because firms don't really make such fine distinctions. The way the curve is compressed, the difference between top 40% and top 60% is probably the difference between 3.25 and 3.4 on a curve like UVA's. Firms just aren't making micro-distinctions in that range.

Also, callback data tends to be supremely unhelpful. Firms will call back all the 3.7's they can get. But their callback median will be way above the median of the people who actually accept offers.

Does work experience allow for bidding more aggressively in these tiers? For example, a couple years of public accounting between undergrad and law school. I'm hoping to sell the client service, long hours, financial statement knowledge, etc. Career services doesn't seem big on it, though.

According to others on this board, this should help you. From my personal experience as a CPA and from my two CPA friends at T14s, it hurt their odds as they were pigeonholed as only wanting tax practices and wanting to jump back to the Big 4 after the JD. In general, WE won't help at this level unless it's an MD/PhD and URM/IP will help to a much greater extent.

Even with audit? I get recruiters are lawyers and not accountants, but most professionals or people in the general business realm seem to know the difference between audit and tax groups. It seems like the broad financial statement knowledge gained from audit would be valuable to M&A and other corporate groups.

[Snape]

Depending on the year, N and C have placed better than D and G. I would suspect N to continue to place well, given it's three-market "story" vs. the two-market stories of DCG.

Its not really depending on the year...its a straight fact that occurs every year. NU dominates the Chicago market and recruiters more and more go lower into the class for the work experience, maturity, and Chicago desire of its students. NU is also doing much better in NY and other markets over the past 10 years. I think for the past 5 years NU has been 1 every year but maybe 2 once for best NLJ250 Career prospects...surely other schools have good chances as well.

Relatedly, back to OPs original question, it entirely depends on who you are with such grades. If you are young and right out of college or maybe a year with no real experience that will set you apart then it will be difficult. If you did Peace Corps or something cool that will interest an employer then your chances go way up....also depends on where you want to practice. IF you want Chicago from Duke or Georgetown I wouldn't waste my time (or at least know chances are extremely unlikely)....it all depends on you and your ability to hustle and what you have already done before law school....median with no experience, young, with few distinguishing features is not a good thing though....

[LawIdiot86]

It's exactly as helpful as it needs to be. Firms don't care about more than approximate grade range breakdowns. My year, at lower T14 your targets for NYC were basically:

Top 5% - WLRK
Top 20% - CSM, S&C, DPW, Cleary, etc
Top 35% - PW, Skadden, K&E, Weil, Deb, etc
Top 65% - Fried Frank, Cahill, etc
Top 80% - NY offices of non-elite non-NY firms

There's no point in going into finer gradations than that, because firms don't really make such fine distinctions. The way the curve is compressed, the difference between top 40% and top 60% is probably the difference between 3.25 and 3.4 on a curve like UVA's. Firms just aren't making micro-distinctions in that range.

Also, callback data tends to be supremely unhelpful. Firms will call back all the 3.7's they can get. But their callback median will be way above the median of the people who actually accept offers.

Does work experience allow for bidding more aggressively in these tiers? For example, a couple years of public accounting between undergrad and law school. I'm hoping to sell the client service, long hours, financial statement knowledge, etc. Career services doesn't seem big on it, though.

According to others on this board, this should help you. From my personal experience as a CPA and from my two CPA friends at T14s, it hurt their odds as they were pigeonholed as only wanting tax practices and wanting to jump back to the Big 4 after the JD. In general, WE won't help at this level unless it's an MD/PhD and URM/IP will help to a much greater extent.

Even with audit? I get recruiters are lawyers and not accountants, but most professionals or people in the general business realm seem to know the difference between audit and tax groups. It seems like the broad financial statement knowledge gained from audit would be valuable to M&A and other corporate groups.

I, and everyone I knew, was tax, but in networking with lawyers for career advice and playing up the audit side of the CPA, the general opinion was that firms will retain accountants to do the technical stuff for M&A DD and that the CPA would only help in being slightly more familar with the documents. They all said a finance or economics background would have been more useful.

[rayiner]

It's exactly as helpful as it needs to be. Firms don't care about more than approximate grade range breakdowns. My year, at lower T14 your targets for NYC were basically:

Top 5% - WLRK
Top 20% - CSM, S&C, DPW, Cleary, etc
Top 35% - PW, Skadden, K&E, Weil, Deb, etc
Top 65% - Fried Frank, Cahill, etc
Top 80% - NY offices of non-elite non-NY firms

There's no point in going into finer gradations than that, because firms don't really make such fine distinctions. The way the curve is compressed, the difference between top 40% and top 60% is probably the difference between 3.25 and 3.4 on a curve like UVA's. Firms just aren't making micro-distinctions in that range.

Also, callback data tends to be supremely unhelpful. Firms will call back all the 3.7's they can get. But their callback median will be way above the median of the people who actually accept offers.

Isn't N different from other lower T14 in that it places extremely well?

Also, would you be willing to do some sort of similar breakdown for CCN? Thanks! .

Based on my conversations with people who know about M and V, I think the above breakdown is pretty accurate.

I think it's important to remember that because grades are such a rough proxy, soft factors matter a lot. A firm might interview 60 people and give 15 callbacks. 30 of those 60 people might be within the grade range the firm is looking for. Within that group, the firm's interviewer will call back two types of people: those with great grades, and those with great softs. So CSM's 15 callbacks might be 10 people well inside the top 10% on LR, and 5 people in the top 10-20% range with great WE or who had a stellar interview.

I don't really know anything about CCN, sorry.

[Anonymous User]

Anecdotal but that was exactly me before last year's OCI (just a hair below median in my case, lower-T14, non-URM, with a few years of irrelevant-but-interesting work experience). I wound up with 4 V50 offers and very happy with the firm I'll be starting at next week.

That said, I know a few people in the top 10%/law review/etc. who either got no offers or just one. I have a couple friends who are totally cool, normal, and in this top-of-the-class boat that didn't get anything. That's why I think a lot of it is - unfortunately - random and luck (the mood your interviewer was in, etc.). On the other hand, I have another friend who had below a 3.0 and landed a V50.

But my best advice to you would be: learn how to interview. Practice. Buy books with tips on interviewing (sounds cheesy but there's a lot to learn). Figure out a strategy (e.g. three things about yourself you want to convey in every interview). Research the hell out of every firm. That's what I did and it worked.

Disclaimer: I'm already an enthusiastic/outgoing person, but I think we can all put on an "outgoing" face for interviews.

If you are still here can you recommend the best interviewing book that you've read?

I'm the anon-
Sorry for the delay, I read this book and thought it was helpful at demystifying the process (even though a lot of it, you'll already know)
I've heard this one is good too.