ITT: Interviewers tell you common instant ding OCI mistakes Forum

[Anonymous User]

OCI Interviewer here, every year I have at least 25% of interviews (closer to 50% or over normally) instantly make my job easier by doing one of the following things, making the rest of the interview a formality.

1. Asking about pro bono- my firm does not even have it and many other firms have very limited opportunities. This is a great indication that you are here for a couple years until you can bounce for a PI position.

2. IMPORTANT: Stating you are interested in a practice area my firm does not have or has in a very limited capacity. Please look at NALP directory and only state interest in the practice groups which are in the top 3 or so in number of attorneys. Cannot tell you how many people express and interest in a practice area where (i) we have 4 or fewer attorneys in the office, or (ii) we have no attorneys in the office doing that work (sometimes even in the entire firm!).

3. Stating that you are looking at firms ranked much higher than us. This is a two way street, and we want to offer people who are going to accept. We know law students are in general prestige whores who are going to take the best ranked bid, and this is a great way for us to not waste our time by extending you an offer.

4. Stating that you are looking at firms in a different city than mine. This one boggles my mind when you can just simply say this is the only city you are looking at, how am I ever going to find out you are bs'ing me. I work in a regional city where people without strong ties or other interests tend to leave, and not showing total dedication tends to be a fatal error. I'd say you can ignore this advice for LA/SF/NY, do not ignore for Chicago, Miami, or any other regional cities.

5. Stating that you are looking to go into business/in-house as your ultimate goal. Great, we will go with the candidate who actually has an interest in staying after we train him or her.

6. You want to do real estate because of property law class, you want to corporate because of contracts class, you want to do litigation because you enjoyed civpro, this one always makes me cringe quite a bit.

[09042014]

Just going to put this out there, this is not a DF parody thread.

[09042014]

Also what kind of shittier firm doens't even allow you to do pro bono.

[Cogburn87]

Half of these are pretty stupid reasons to ding someone. lol @ this profession.

[Anonymous User]

4. Stating that you are looking at firms in a different city than mine. This one boggles my mind when you can just simply say this is the only city you are looking at, how am I ever going to find out you are bs'ing me. I work in a regional city where people without strong ties or other interests tend to leave, and not showing total dedication tends to be a fatal error. I'd say you can ignore this advice for LA/SF/NY, do not ignore for Chicago, Miami, or any other regional cities.

So, if I'm interviewing with a NY firm and mention that I would also be interested in their Miami office, I would not get dinged.

But if I'm interviewing with a Pittsburgh office and mention that I would also be interested in their Miami office, I would get dinged?

Is that what you're saying? Why? (Seriously curious)

[Chrstgtr]

5. Stating that you are looking to go into business/in-house as your ultimate goal. Great, we will go with the candidate who actually has an interest in staying after we train him or her.

Can someone explain why firms are so worried about people exiting to other gigs like in-house after they are trained when the firms know that almost no one hired will eventfully make partner even if they did stick around until they are fired.

If you want to know how long someone is going to stick around for it seems like you might as well ask how much debt they have from law school (asking what their scholarship was to measure it by proxy if not directly) since having nondischargable debt is one of the few reasons that demand a person to stick in a biglaw job even if they hate it.

[L’Étranger]

OCI Interviewer here, every year I have at least 25% of interviews (closer to 50% or over normally) instantly make my job easier by doing one of the following things, making the rest of the interview a formality.

1. Asking about pro bono- my firm does not even have it and many other firms have very limited opportunities. This is a great indication that you are here for a couple years until you can bounce for a PI position.

2. IMPORTANT: Stating you are interested in a practice area my firm does not have or has in a very limited capacity. Please look at NALP directory and only state interest in the practice groups which are in the top 3 or so in number of attorneys. Cannot tell you how many people express and interest in a practice area where (i) we have 4 or fewer attorneys in the office, or (ii) we have no attorneys in the office doing that work (sometimes even in the entire firm!).

3. Stating that you are looking at firms ranked much higher than us. This is a two way street, and we want to offer people who are going to accept. We know law students are in general prestige whores who are going to take the best ranked bid, and this is a great way for us to not waste our time by extending you an offer.

4. Stating that you are looking at firms in a different city than mine. This one boggles my mind when you can just simply say this is the only city you are looking at, how am I ever going to find out you are bs'ing me. I work in a regional city where people without strong ties or other interests tend to leave, and not showing total dedication tends to be a fatal error. I'd say you can ignore this advice for LA/SF/NY, do not ignore for Chicago, Miami, or any other regional cities.

5. Stating that you are looking to go into business/in-house as your ultimate goal. Great, we will go with the candidate who actually has an interest in staying after we train him or her.

6. You want to do real estate because of property law class, you want to corporate because of contracts class, you want to do litigation because you enjoyed civpro, this one always makes me cringe quite a bit.

I hope this is a troll.

With the exception of 2., these are pretty benign interviewee remarks that don't in any way necessitate the conclusions that OP is drawing.

[Cogburn87]

It's flame. It jumped early with the pro bono one.

[dixiecupdrinking]

I don't think this is flame, I think it's a list of weird genuinely held feelings.

But, like OP said, interviewing is a two way street. If you ask a firm about their pro bono practices and they say "we don't do pro bono," walk away.

[Anonymous User]

I am an OCI interviewer for a V50 in a major east coast market (NY/DC). I think this thread is a great idea but I also disagree with some of OP's points. Here's a V50 NY/DC perspective on each --

1) Disagree. Mentioning pro bono is fine, as long as you don't make it sound like the only thing you want to do at biglaw. My firm (like almost all biglaw in NY/DC) allows and encourages a significant number of pro bono hours per year. It's fine to mention in a screener but only after expressing your serious interest in a particular billable practice area.

2) Agree. Do your homework, kids.

3) Agree. Don't be mentioning other firms during your interview at all, unless asked. And be prepared to explain why you like my firm better than those other firms you're interviewing with (even if it's just a cursory explanation -- no need to pretend like you have intimate knowledge of my firm versus others). If you come across like my firm is just another random set of dead white guys' last names followed by an LLP, you won't get far.

4) Disagree. You can look wherever you want, as long as you can give reasonable assurances that you'd be willing to live in our city if you got the job with us.

5) Agree. There's nothing wrong with wanting to go in-house and law firms actually like placing their associates in-house with potential clients, but this isn't something to tout during a screener or callback interview. It's something you might mention after working at the firm for 2-3 years. Law firms want gunner associates who will bill 2500 hours in pursuit of partner track, not associates who will coast billing 1800 to survive for 3 years before going in-house.

6) Agree. You can be honest about not knowing exactly what you want to do, if that's the case. Don't pretend that you understand white collar criminal defense because you "liked criminal law" or whatever. It makes you come across as naive and unprepared for the work of a biglaw associate.

[L’Étranger]

It's flame. It jumped early with the pro bono one.

There's too much weird trolling/flaming on TLS. Why do people do it?

[pertristis]

I am an OCI interviewer for a V50 in a major east coast market (NY/DC). I think this thread is a great idea but I also disagree with some of OP's points. Here's a V50 NY/DC perspective on each --

1) Disagree. Mentioning pro bono is fine, as long as you don't make it sound like the only thing you want to do at biglaw. My firm (like almost all biglaw in NY/DC) allows and encourages a significant number of pro bono hours per year. It's fine to mention in a screener but only after expressing your serious interest in a particular billable practice area.

There are a small handful of firms—I'm thinking Jenner—who actually want you to talk about pro bono.

[09042014]

OCI Interviewer here, every year I have at least 25% of interviews (closer to 50% or over normally) instantly make my job easier by doing one of the following things, making the rest of the interview a formality.

1. Asking about pro bono- my firm does not even have it and many other firms have very limited opportunities. This is a great indication that you are here for a couple years until you can bounce for a PI position.

2. IMPORTANT: Stating you are interested in a practice area my firm does not have or has in a very limited capacity. Please look at NALP directory and only state interest in the practice groups which are in the top 3 or so in number of attorneys. Cannot tell you how many people express and interest in a practice area where (i) we have 4 or fewer attorneys in the office, or (ii) we have no attorneys in the office doing that work (sometimes even in the entire firm!).

3. Stating that you are looking at firms ranked much higher than us. This is a two way street, and we want to offer people who are going to accept. We know law students are in general prestige whores who are going to take the best ranked bid, and this is a great way for us to not waste our time by extending you an offer.

4. Stating that you are looking at firms in a different city than mine. This one boggles my mind when you can just simply say this is the only city you are looking at, how am I ever going to find out you are bs'ing me. I work in a regional city where people without strong ties or other interests tend to leave, and not showing total dedication tends to be a fatal error. I'd say you can ignore this advice for LA/SF/NY, do not ignore for Chicago, Miami, or any other regional cities.

5. Stating that you are looking to go into business/in-house as your ultimate goal. Great, we will go with the candidate who actually has an interest in staying after we train him or her.

6. You want to do real estate because of property law class, you want to corporate because of contracts class, you want to do litigation because you enjoyed civpro, this one always makes me cringe quite a bit.

1. Disagree with merely asking about it, but agree if it appears you only are interesting in Pro Bono.

2. Pretty much agree.

3. lol at this.

4. Sort of agree.

5. Lol - you are going to have a bad time when you figure out you aren't getting partner bro.

6. I agree this isn't a good look, but dinging someone for it is a bit strong.

[BigZuck]

It's kind of crazy to me that firms use good grades as some sort of indication that a candidate might be a good lawyer/employee but then if a candidate uses their enjoyment of contracts class to be an indication that they might like corporate work, they get insta-dinged.

Most of what we have to go on is based on our experience in law school. Most of what firms have to go on is based on our experience in law school. Why should we get insta dinged for that?

But life isn't fair, etc.

[dixiecupdrinking]

It's kind of crazy to me that firms use good grades as some sort of indication that a candidate might be a good lawyer/employee but then if a candidate uses their enjoyment of contracts class to be an indication that they might like corporate work, they get insta-dinged.

Most of what we have to go on is based on our experience in law school. Most of what firms have to go on is based on our experience in law school. Why should we get insta dinged for that?

But life isn't fair, etc.

I think it completely depends on how you cabin it.

OK: "I really liked thinking about the issues that we discussed in my evidence and civ pro classes, and I'm looking forward to learning how those concepts actually play out in litigation, though I understand the real world will be very different, so I'm not sure yet what area of practice I'm most interested in"
Bad: "I want to be a litigator because Pennoyer."

[objctnyrhnr]

OCI Interviewer here, every year I have at least 25% of interviews (closer to 50% or over normally) instantly make my job easier by doing one of the following things, making the rest of the interview a formality.

1. Asking about pro bono- my firm does not even have it and many other firms have very limited opportunities. This is a great indication that you are here for a couple years until you can bounce for a PI position.

2. IMPORTANT: Stating you are interested in a practice area my firm does not have or has in a very limited capacity. Please look at NALP directory and only state interest in the practice groups which are in the top 3 or so in number of attorneys. Cannot tell you how many people express and interest in a practice area where (i) we have 4 or fewer attorneys in the office, or (ii) we have no attorneys in the office doing that work (sometimes even in the entire firm!).

3. Stating that you are looking at firms ranked much higher than us. This is a two way street, and we want to offer people who are going to accept. We know law students are in general prestige whores who are going to take the best ranked bid, and this is a great way for us to not waste our time by extending you an offer.

4. Stating that you are looking at firms in a different city than mine. This one boggles my mind when you can just simply say this is the only city you are looking at, how am I ever going to find out you are bs'ing me. I work in a regional city where people without strong ties or other interests tend to leave, and not showing total dedication tends to be a fatal error. I'd say you can ignore this advice for LA/SF/NY, do not ignore for Chicago, Miami, or any other regional cities.

5. Stating that you are looking to go into business/in-house as your ultimate goal. Great, we will go with the candidate who actually has an interest in staying after we train him or her.

6. You want to do real estate because of property law class, you want to corporate because of contracts class, you want to do litigation because you enjoyed civpro, this one always makes me cringe quite a bit.

you biglaw types are such a kind, caring people.

[middlemarch]

I am an OCI interviewer for a V50 in a major east coast market (NY/DC). I think this thread is a great idea but I also disagree with some of OP's points. Here's a V50 NY/DC perspective on each --

1) Disagree. Mentioning pro bono is fine, as long as you don't make it sound like the only thing you want to do at biglaw. My firm (like almost all biglaw in NY/DC) allows and encourages a significant number of pro bono hours per year. It's fine to mention in a screener but only after expressing your serious interest in a particular billable practice area.

There are a small handful of firms—I'm thinking Jenner—who actually want you to talk about pro bono.

Chambers Associates has a survey of firm billing targets, and one of the columns lists the avg. pro bono hours per attorney. I think Jenner, Wilmer, and Gibson Dunn were the top three, with average pro bono time well over 100 hrs. Certainly firm commitment to pro bono varies, but frankly I'd be very surprised if a firm that dinged every candidate that mentioned an interest in pro bono work could manage to get any summer associates from top schools--people want interesting work, and fulfilling work beyond typical drudgery.

[Anonymous User]

OCI Interviewer here, every year I have at least 25% of interviews (closer to 50% or over normally) instantly make my job easier by doing one of the following things, making the rest of the interview a formality.

1. Asking about pro bono- my firm does not even have it and many other firms have very limited opportunities. This is a great indication that you are here for a couple years until you can bounce for a PI position.

2. IMPORTANT: Stating you are interested in a practice area my firm does not have or has in a very limited capacity. Please look at NALP directory and only state interest in the practice groups which are in the top 3 or so in number of attorneys. Cannot tell you how many people express and interest in a practice area where (i) we have 4 or fewer attorneys in the office, or (ii) we have no attorneys in the office doing that work (sometimes even in the entire firm!).

3. Stating that you are looking at firms ranked much higher than us. This is a two way street, and we want to offer people who are going to accept. We know law students are in general prestige whores who are going to take the best ranked bid, and this is a great way for us to not waste our time by extending you an offer.

4. Stating that you are looking at firms in a different city than mine. This one boggles my mind when you can just simply say this is the only city you are looking at, how am I ever going to find out you are bs'ing me. I work in a regional city where people without strong ties or other interests tend to leave, and not showing total dedication tends to be a fatal error. I'd say you can ignore this advice for LA/SF/NY, do not ignore for Chicago, Miami, or any other regional cities.

5. Stating that you are looking to go into business/in-house as your ultimate goal. Great, we will go with the candidate who actually has an interest in staying after we train him or her.

6. You want to do real estate because of property law class, you want to corporate because of contracts class, you want to do litigation because you enjoyed civpro, this one always makes me cringe quite a bit.

1. Disagree with merely asking about it, but agree if it appears you only are interesting in Pro Bono.

2. Pretty much agree.

3. lol at this.

4. Sort of agree.

5. Lol - you are going to have a bad time when you figure out you aren't getting partner bro.

6. I agree this isn't a good look, but dinging someone for it is a bit strong.

OP here, no reason to lash out at me I don't set firm policies. This is a hilarious profession in how arbitrary and petty people are, you wont get disagreement from me.

1. My firm flat out does not have pro bono and actively encourages people not to take it on. Plenty of other biglaw firms have programs but discourage associates from using them (especially transactional practices, never heard of a transactional friend doing it, nobody wants to sink a deadline because you were out doing pro bono). Probably ok to ask at most places but why do you really need to? They either have it or don't, read the website. Psychologically, people do not want to hear that one of the aspects you are most excited for is something you will spend less than 5% of your time on.

2. Not sure how this is crazy. We just had someone in our interview say he wanted to be an antitrust lawyer and we do not have an antitrust practice. Seems perfectly reasonable to ding if not due to mismatch, due to him being an idiot and not bothering to even research.

3. My V50 used to offer V10 calibre candidates, guess what? They always pick the V10 firms. They end up taking the entire 30 day period because these people usually have a ton of offers and then you are shit out of luck picking up candidates that every other firm passed on. We shoot for people who are a realistic match, not sure how this is crazy. Unless someone mentions a specific reason for our firm vs the V10, we have no reason to think they will pick us.

4. Allow me to elaborate. Firm is in a cold weather regional city. Firm has lost a ton of candidates to bigger more attractive warm weather cities. Our entire interview process is pressing candidates on ties and nailing down that they will only live in our city due to location of family and friends. People who don't have strong ties to regional cities almost always end up leaving from my experience. If you already say you are looking at other cities, we are very concerned you are not staying long term.

5. Nobody is making partner, who cares. Doesn't mean you should tell people during an interview that your ultimate goal is to bounce to an opportunity at the end of three years. When you are dating multiple girls, do you tell the girl you are less into, "hey I've actually started seeing this beautiful women and so I only anticipate this relationship is going on if this other girl ends up not being interested in me, cool?"

6. I mistated this one my bad. I only mean when this is the candidates primary reason for wanting to practice my area. I have many candidates say they want to do lit because of civpro and lawschool, versus others drawing on their past summer experience and sometimes paralegal experience. As a lawyer, it is a complete turn off when someone thinks practicing law is anything like law school, it is just so far from the truth.

I think a main theme behind my point not repeated on TLS is as biglaw firms, we are concerned you may not like us and we are concerned you may leave after 3 years as so many do (I will probably be doing so myself). We get that this is the reality no matter what but do not go ahead and affirmatively rub it in our face that you will like all others, end up being another 2 year burnout or waste of an offer that chose [insert more prestigious law firm]

[84651846190]

OCI Interviewer here, every year I have at least 25% of interviews (closer to 50% or over normally) instantly make my job easier by doing one of the following things, making the rest of the interview a formality.

6. You want to do real estate because of property law class, you want to corporate because of contracts class, you want to do litigation because you enjoyed civpro, this one always makes me cringe quite a bit.

This is not a reason to ding someone, you idiot. Law students make decisions about practice areas based on what they know, and that largely includes what they learn in their classes. You shouldn't expect people who have not practiced law to know anything about practicing law. You also shouldn't view their preferences of practice areas as a sign they think they know more than they really do. They know they've got to express interest in a practice area, because many firms expect it, and they're just doing the best job they can of articulating why.

[Anonymous User]

OCI Interviewer here, every year I have at least 25% of interviews (closer to 50% or over normally) instantly make my job easier by doing one of the following things, making the rest of the interview a formality.

6. You want to do real estate because of property law class, you want to corporate because of contracts class, you want to do litigation because you enjoyed civpro, this one always makes me cringe quite a bit.

This is not a reason to ding someone, you idiot. Law students make decisions about practice areas based on what they know, and that largely includes what they learn in their classes. You shouldn't expect people who have not practiced law to know anything about practicing law. You also shouldn't view their preferences of practice areas as a sign they think they know more than they really do. They know they've got to express interest in a practice area, because many firms expect it, and they're just doing the best job they can of articulating why.

This is the V50 interviewer who responded before.

As OP just explained, the problem isn't saying a class sparked one's interest in a particular practice. The problem is thinking that the practice is anything like law school, or acting like one actually knows anything about biglaw because of a class. As one person eloquently mused:

Bad: "I want to be a litigator because Pennoyer."

[84651846190]

OCI Interviewer here, every year I have at least 25% of interviews (closer to 50% or over normally) instantly make my job easier by doing one of the following things, making the rest of the interview a formality.

6. You want to do real estate because of property law class, you want to corporate because of contracts class, you want to do litigation because you enjoyed civpro, this one always makes me cringe quite a bit.

This is not a reason to ding someone, you idiot. Law students make decisions about practice areas based on what they know, and that largely includes what they learn in their classes. You shouldn't expect people who have not practiced law to know anything about practicing law. You also shouldn't view their preferences of practice areas as a sign they think they know more than they really do. They know they've got to express interest in a practice area, because many firms expect it, and they're just doing the best job they can of articulating why.

This is the V50 interviewer who responded before.

As OP just explained, the problem isn't saying a class sparked one's interest in a particular practice. The problem is thinking that the practice is anything like law school, or acting like one actually knows anything about biglaw because of a class. As one person eloquently mused:

Bad: "I want to be a litigator because Pennoyer."

I usually just dismiss anything interviewees say about practice preference and focus on more important things, like their poise, grades, personality, etc. There's a decent probability that they'll switch preferences before they start anyway.

[Anonymous User]

On one on my SA interviews, they told me that it was impossible to make partner in the firm without caring about pro bono. This was in SoCal, so maybe that had something to do with it.

[mw115]

Saying you want to go in house gives the impression that you're looking for a 9-5 schedule.

[Anonymous User]

OCI Interviewer here, every year I have at least 25% of interviews (closer to 50% or over normally) instantly make my job easier by doing one of the following things, making the rest of the interview a formality.

6. You want to do real estate because of property law class, you want to corporate because of contracts class, you want to do litigation because you enjoyed civpro, this one always makes me cringe quite a bit.

This is not a reason to ding someone, you idiot. Law students make decisions about practice areas based on what they know, and that largely includes what they learn in their classes. You shouldn't expect people who have not practiced law to know anything about practicing law. You also shouldn't view their preferences of practice areas as a sign they think they know more than they really do. They know they've got to express interest in a practice area, because many firms expect it, and they're just doing the best job they can of articulating why.

Lol, I am shocked a V20 associate is capable of writing something so stupid, but I guess it makes sense since most of these firms don't let associates do any actual work until the 4th or 5th year. Who do you think I'm going to recommend for the offer, the guy who goes "I want to real estate law because I was a real estate broker/did landlord/tenant law over summer/ worked at relevant municipal authority" or the guy in the screener who went "hurrr property law class and the fascinating eminent domain case I learned about"

[A. Nony Mouse]

you biglaw types are such a kind, caring people.

I mean, to be fair, that's not the purpose of biglaw and not what they're hiring for.

6. You want to do real estate because of property law class, you want to corporate because of contracts class, you want to do litigation because you enjoyed civpro, this one always makes me cringe quite a bit.

I don't interview but this makes me cringe, too. Practice isn't anything like 1L classes. As suggested, I'm sure some people pull it off, but I get a lot don't.

And the thing about insta-dinging for one of these things - I'm willing to bet the very purpose of a screener is to weed people out. There are too many applicants for too few jobs. They're looking for reasons to ding, even if the reasons themselves don't have much to do with your lawyering ability. Your job is not to give them that reason.