If splitting between a firm & McKinsey, will you get no-offered? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I've heard that if a 2L is splitting between a law firm and McKinsey, they will almost always go to McKinsey full-time. Since the law firm knows this, they are more likely to no-offer this candidate in order to protect their numbers. Is there any truth to this?

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

"Protect their numbers?"

Law firms don't do yield protect. Matter of fact, they try very hard not to no-offer people precisely because it looks bad.

[Anonymous User]

We had one summer do this and they were by far the biggest threat for being no-offered. They ended up picking McKinsey.

I don't think they were no offered. (Said everyone got offers)

[Anonymous User]

We had one summer do this and they were by far the biggest threat for being no-offered. They ended up picking McKinsey.

I don't think they were no offered. (Said everyone got offers)

[OP Anon here.] If you don't mind me asking, which law school did this SA go to? (Probably YHSCCN, right?) And we're they in a joint JD/MBA program, or JD only?

[Anonymous User]

"Protect their numbers?"

Law firms don't do yield protect. Matter of fact, they try very hard not to no-offer people precisely because it looks bad.

THIS.

And, look, you'll have to let your summer firm know that you're intending to split. If they thought they would end up no-offering you because you were probably going to jump to McKinsey (or a higher-ranked law firm, for that matter), why wouldn't they just not approve your split in the first place? FYI, every firm that I brought up splitting with McKinsey with was cool with it.

[Anonymous User]

We had one summer do this and they were by far the biggest threat for being no-offered. They ended up picking McKinsey.

I don't think they were no offered. (Said everyone got offers)

[OP Anon here.] If you don't mind me asking, which law school did this SA go to? (Probably YHSCCN, right?) And we're they in a joint JD/MBA program, or JD only?

Yep YHSCCN; just JD

i don't think it makes you any more likely to be no offered but when people have an alternative they find potentially more attractive they act accordingly while summering at the firm

that's the thing to avoid

[hangingtree]

"Protect their numbers?"

Law firms don't do yield protect. Matter of fact, they try very hard not to no-offer people precisely because it looks bad.

THIS.

And, look, you'll have to let your summer firm know that you're intending to split. If they thought they would end up no-offering you because you were probably going to jump to McKinsey (or a higher-ranked law firm, for that matter), why wouldn't they just not approve your split in the first place? FYI, every firm that I brought up splitting with McKinsey with was cool with it.

There's all of this, but also, even if your firm isn't playing the 100% offer rate game and actually putting you through some sort of test, because they still have to invest in you--paying you thousands for doing nothing--for the rest of the summer, there's no reason for them to not offer you. Now, if they get you, good. Perhaps you're excited about coming back to the firm over McKinsey; they'll be willing to offer you and see. If you don't accept, too bad, maybe consider 3L hiring. But they lose nothing by offering you. If anything they'll offer you because of the sunk cost fallacy. "Well, even though we know s/he's not coming back, we've spent this much on him/her, so we'll give the offer".

I'm scared to say this will be the case 100% of the time, but I will say your thinking about this issue is a little bit off. Definitely reasonable, but not actually how it usually works.

[Anonymous User]

Hi there,

I was a summer that split between a firm and McKinsey, and know of others that did this. I got an offer from both, picked McKinsey. It's really not an issue, as others mentioned top law firms very rarely no-offer.

I will say though, most of the partners, associates, recruiters, etc. at the law firm had a bit of an inferiority complex to McK, and kinda sorta just assumed I would take it over their offer. It was very important to downplay McK to the extent possible during my time at the law firm, and keep the cards close to my chest so to speak. If you decide to split, you should do the same and not constantly talk about McK, act uninterested in the law firm, etc. Should go without saying, but probably worth mentioning.

[KaNa1986]

Hi there,

I was a summer that split between a firm and McKinsey, and know of others that did this. I got an offer from both, picked McKinsey. It's really not an issue, as others mentioned top law firms very rarely no-offer.

I will say though, most of the partners, associates, recruiters, etc. at the law firm had a bit of an inferiority complex to McK, and kinda sorta just assumed I would take it over their offer. It was very important to downplay McK to the extent possible during my time at the law firm, and keep the cards close to my chest so to speak. If you decide to split, you should do the same and not constantly talk about McK, act uninterested in the law firm, etc. Should go without saying, but probably worth mentioning.

This is only partially true depending on the law firm. Wachtell, S&C, Cravath will not care, and in fact most of the JD/MBA grads I know chose top firms over McKinsey after splitting. The above poster's comment might be true to a greater extent in the context of a non-V10 firm.

[Anonymous User]

This is only partially true depending on the law firm. Wachtell, S&C, Cravath will not care, and in fact most of the JD/MBA grads I know chose top firms over McKinsey after splitting. The above poster's comment might be true to a greater extent in the context of a non-V10 firm.

Quoted anon here. I summered at a "V10". Just about all McK splits split at V10s.

[Anonymous User]

Sorry for derailing, but as someone considering McKinsey what's the value of it job-wise, pay-wise, and time-wise over biglaw? How easy (or hard) is it to switch to a big firm after a few years?

[Anonymous User]

This is only partially true depending on the law firm. Wachtell, S&C, Cravath will not care, and in fact most of the JD/MBA grads I know chose top firms over McKinsey after splitting. The above poster's comment might be true to a greater extent in the context of a non-V10 firm.

Quoted anon here. I summered at a "V10". Just about all McK splits split at V10s.

This is not true at H.

MBB splits are at an entire range of firms, and the full-time offers (3L recruiting) likewise go way out of the "V10" range.

[Anonymous User]

Sorry for derailing, but as someone considering McKinsey what's the value of it job-wise, pay-wise, and time-wise over biglaw? How easy (or hard) is it to switch to a big firm after a few years?

Taking MBB. Better QOL, better pay, more interesting work, better exit ops (although harsher up-or-out). Didn't seem to mind the travel.

It's a one-way street. You can go from biglaw -> MBB (starting as a year 1 consultant), but I've only very very rarely seen MBB -> biglaw. Although I'm not sure how much that is a result of just being a less desirable option.

[Anonymous User]

Sorry for derailing, but as someone considering McKinsey what's the value of it job-wise, pay-wise, and time-wise over biglaw? How easy (or hard) is it to switch to a big firm after a few years?

After you join McKinsey, your experience will depend a lot on engagements you're put on. Because McKinsey is so large, you might work on high impact projects for high profile clients, or you might work on low impact projects for clients you've never heard of in flyover cities.

Value job-wise: you gain modeling and problem solving skills.
Pay-wise: not more than New York BigLaw, averaged out over the business cycle.
Time-wise: slightly fewer hours than law, though a lot more travel.

[Anonymous User]

Sorry for derailing, but as someone considering McKinsey what's the value of it job-wise, pay-wise, and time-wise over biglaw? How easy (or hard) is it to switch to a big firm after a few years?

Taking MBB. Better QOL, better pay, more interesting work, better exit ops (although harsher up-or-out). Didn't seem to mind the travel.

It's a one-way street. You can go from biglaw -> MBB (starting as a year 1 consultant), but I've only very very rarely seen MBB -> biglaw. Although I'm not sure how much that is a result of just being a less desirable option.

I've heard MBA students at HBS describe MBB as inferior to BigLaw, at least V10. Whether BigLaw or consulting is better depends on your interests and goals.

[Anonymous User]

Same anon who apologized for derailing.

Anon 1: You mention better QOL and pay, so would you agree with the anon below you? Working 80+ biglaw for 160K is obviously less preferable than comparable pay for less hours. Though the travel is intriguing.

Anon 2: Have you gone through the interview rounds? They seem fairly intense, and I'm not sure how to translate a law education/lib arts education to what they're looking for in the interview and modeling/problem solving. Also, do they place as much emphasis on LS grades as firms, or do they care more about UG? (Sorry for the amount of questions.)

Anon 3: Have you met anyone who's done or considered both and specifically mentioned why they chose one option over the other? I'm more interested in the transactional/business side of law to begin with, and was considering consulting work before LS. Not sure how much that should matter, if at all.

[Anonymous User]

Sorry for derailing, but as someone considering McKinsey what's the value of it job-wise, pay-wise, and time-wise over biglaw? How easy (or hard) is it to switch to a big firm after a few years?

Taking MBB. Better QOL, better pay, more interesting work, better exit ops (although harsher up-or-out). Didn't seem to mind the travel.

It's a one-way street. You can go from biglaw -> MBB (starting as a year 1 consultant), but I've only very very rarely seen MBB -> biglaw. Although I'm not sure how much that is a result of just being a less desirable option.

I've heard MBA students at HBS describe MBB as inferior to BigLaw, at least V10. Whether BigLaw or consulting is better depends on your interests and goals.

JD/MBA here - that bolded part should be taken with a gigantic grain of salt. Pretty much every MBA I know assumes a BigLaw job is the best thing ever and wow how awesome, etc...B-school students 99% of the time have little to no knowledge at all regarding practice of law. This is even moreso at HBS where many try to downplay the MBB/Bulge bracket goals as no big deal so they don't take an ego hit if they don't get one, given how everyone who comes from one of those backgrounds pre-MBA tends to do all they can to appear humble about it and talk about how nbd it was all the time.

[Anonymous User]

Howdy,

Original Anon that replied who summered at MBB and split. Just wanted to address a few things mentioned and add my own perspectives.

This is not true at H.

MBB splits are at an entire range of firms, and the full-time offers (3L recruiting) likewise go way out of the "V10" range.

This really isn't a point worth arguing about, I agree there are people that go outside V10 (though I would imagine everyone has the option of v10 if they want it). I don't even really care about V10, hence the quotation marks. I was more confused as to why you were downplaying my remark that law firm attorneys were relatively insecure about MBB and dismissed it as something that likely happens outside the V10. That's not true, as per my own experience, which was my point.

Anonymous User wrote:
Sorry for derailing, but as someone considering McKinsey what's the value of it job-wise, pay-wise, and time-wise over biglaw? How easy (or hard) is it to switch to a big firm after a few years?

Taking MBB. Better QOL, better pay, more interesting work, better exit ops (although harsher up-or-out). Didn't seem to mind the travel.

It's a one-way street. You can go from biglaw -> MBB (starting as a year 1 consultant), but I've only very very rarely seen MBB -> biglaw. Although I'm not sure how much that is a result of just being a less desirable option.

I would agree with this anon poster. Overall better QOL, better pay (although not by a huge margin, not a reason to jump to consulting in and of itself for sure), better exit ops assuming of course you want business exit ops, and yes it is harsher up-or-out: if you can manage the lifestyle, biglaw will rarely fire you. MBB will ask you to leave if you don't produce, there's no hiding in the cracks.

I also second the path; if you go MBB after law school, you are effectively saying you will never practice law. I don't see why you would ever want to go from MBB to BigLaw, given the way better exit ops you'd have, that's for sure.

Anon 1: You mention better QOL and pay, so would you agree with the anon below you? Working 80+ biglaw for 160K is obviously less preferable than comparable pay for less hours. Though the travel is intriguing.

Anon 2: Have you gone through the interview rounds? They seem fairly intense, and I'm not sure how to translate a law education/lib arts education to what they're looking for in the interview and modeling/problem solving. Also, do they place as much emphasis on LS grades as firms, or do they care more about UG? (Sorry for the amount of questions.)

Anon 3: Have you met anyone who's done or considered both and specifically mentioned why they chose one option over the other? I'm more interested in the transactional/business side of law to begin with, and was considering consulting work before LS. Not sure how much that should matter, if at all.

I'll just answer these as best I can, lost track of who is which anon lol.

1 - No, the pay is higher (though again, not by a huge margin or anything). The QOL is also better just because it is more predictable - you will likely work pretty darn hard Mon-Thurs, but Fridays are relatively relaxed usually and weekend work is rare. The predictability is not there at all in BigLaw.

2 - Well I did go through the interview rounds since I'm going there full-time. The process is a little black-box in terms of how much they value LS grades to be honest, but I don't think the emphasis is there quite as much. If you're at a t-14, I think you have a pretty good chance of getting to the Round 1 problem solving test (if I had to guess, most of the people are top half of their class or something, but no way of verifying that). Once you are in the interview process, the interviews are what are most determinative of if you get the job or not. I wouldn't worry about a law education translating to what they look for specifically, they're not testing your law knowledge. Can you do the cases? yes, then proceed. no, then dinged.

3 - Well, yeah this is me. I summered for a large NYC firm in the transactional group. See above for why MBB was my choice (QOL, pay, more interesting work overall).

[jzoffer456]

I am trying to split between bcg and gs 2L summer. Going to negotiate hard. If that doesn't work out, will probably work at Kirkland for 6 weeks and then gs for 10. Most law firms are very amenable to splitting with non-law organizations (especially if they deem it prestigious and that seems to make them want you more). However, if you want McK, you should probably stay there for their whole summer program. (I am not even telling my bank that I will be working for 6 weeks before their program starts).

[Anonymous User]

I am trying to split between bcg and gs 2L summer. Going to negotiate hard. If that doesn't work out, will probably work at Kirkland for 6 weeks and then gs for 10. Most law firms are very amenable to splitting with non-law organizations (especially if they deem it prestigious and that seems to make them want you more). However, if you want McK, you should probably stay there for their whole summer program. (I am not even telling my bank that I will be working for 6 weeks before their program starts).

Just curious why you're trying to fit in two demanding (banking & consulting) internships into one summer? Usually the point is to work for one company, get an offer and come back full time. If it's about picking up extra money, fair enough, but I don't get it from a career standpoint unless you're just trying to get exposure to more industries.

I don't think most MBA students know or care much about BigLaw prestige, much less what "V10" means. MBB/investment banking is obviously still seen as fairly prestigious, and (especially with MBB) even at the top schools there's no guarantee you will waltz into a position, but a lot of students tend to shoot for PE/HF/unicorn tech jobs as a first choice.

[Anonymous User]

Howdy,

Original Anon that replied who summered at MBB and split. Just wanted to address a few things mentioned and add my own perspectives.

This is not true at H.

MBB splits are at an entire range of firms, and the full-time offers (3L recruiting) likewise go way out of the "V10" range.

This really isn't a point worth arguing about, I agree there are people that go outside V10 (though I would imagine everyone has the option of v10 if they want it). I don't even really care about V10, hence the quotation marks. I was more confused as to why you were downplaying my remark that law firm attorneys were relatively insecure about MBB and dismissed it as something that likely happens outside the V10. That's not true, as per my own experience, which was my point.

Sorry - just a quick follow up on this. I (honestly) wasn't trying to be pedantic when I made the correction, but I should've clarified why I thought that this was important to point out. Biglaw and MBB have very different hiring processes, at the very least at H where there is completely no grade screen. It's just not true that all the 2Ls/3Ls from H going into MBB "could get" V10, even from a school where hitting median after 1L gets you an offer at Skadden/Cravath. I know multiple people going in who either split with or spent their 2L summer at V30-50 firms in major markets.

The only thing that matters for MBB hiring is the interview, i.e. fit and case ability, and to a MUCH lesser extent your test scores (SATs, McK PST). I don't recommend MBB as a backup option for people who struck out of biglaw or didn't get the firm that they wanted, if only because it's still incredibly difficult to get an offer and not something that you could ever bank on. But I did want to offer my own 2c that people with median or lower grades shouldn't be put off by the supposed selectivity of the MBB hiring process, because in the end it looks for qualities that don't necessarily overlap with doing well in law school.

(ETA: I wasn't the anon who was talking about law firms having inferiority complexes. That was a third dude.)

Sorry for derailing, but as someone considering McKinsey what's the value of it job-wise, pay-wise, and time-wise over biglaw? How easy (or hard) is it to switch to a big firm after a few years?

Value job-wise: you gain modeling and problem solving skills.
Pay-wise: not more than New York BigLaw, averaged out over the business cycle.
Time-wise: slightly fewer hours than law, though a lot more travel.

I don't think I've seen enough projects to have a take on "value," but I really would argue that QOL/time favors MBB. (I'm obviously biased.) Each MBB is moving to a pretty-enforced policy of protecting weekends and PTO, which as I understand is decidedly not the case for NY biglaw. It's a tough four days at client, and the rest (Fri onwards) is pretty chill. Travel is the big variable, and some people will just hate it more than others. But I would also point out that project location is one of the things that MBB allows you to optimize for, and BCG runs on a regional staffing model while Bain is mostly local (McKinsey is the only one with a truly international staffing model).

On pay, MBB pays better at the junior/mid levels than NY biglaw but I'd agree that the difference isn't significant enough to outweigh other factors. One thing that I did consider was that pay is the same across NA offices, whereas if I did decide to leave NY for my secondary home market I'd probably take a significant pay cut (and the quality of assignments would probably drop).

[Anonymous User]

1 - No, the pay is higher (though again, not by a huge margin or anything). The QOL is also better just because it is more predictable - you will likely work pretty darn hard Mon-Thurs, but Fridays are relatively relaxed usually and weekend work is rare. The predictability is not there at all in BigLaw.

2 - Well I did go through the interview rounds since I'm going there full-time...

Seems odd to give an objective response re: QOL when you haven't actually done either before. Even taking your best guess as truth, from having done it, traveling and being on the road for 4-5 days a week isn't easy. Once there's a family involved, it's downright terrible. And good luck with those relaxed fridays with rare weekend work...

[Anonymous User]

1 - No, the pay is higher (though again, not by a huge margin or anything). The QOL is also better just because it is more predictable - you will likely work pretty darn hard Mon-Thurs, but Fridays are relatively relaxed usually and weekend work is rare. The predictability is not there at all in BigLaw.

2 - Well I did go through the interview rounds since I'm going there full-time...

Seems odd to give an objective response re: QOL when you haven't actually done either before. Even taking your best guess as truth, from having done it, traveling and being on the road for 4-5 days a week isn't easy. Once there's a family involved, it's downright terrible. And good luck with those relaxed fridays with rare weekend work...

Spent a summer. (And one at biglaw. Being an SA was the most fun I've had in my life.) Didn't mind the travel, I don't think that'll change. I agree that the calculation is different with a family. I mean, I'm not sure, I do/will work at a huge office with a local client base; no one that I talked to seemed to think that it was going to be a problem to pull 2-3 non-travel projects in a row if I was flexible on other fronts.

As noted, I don't feel qualified enough to render an opinion on whether MBB gives you some super-business-skillset that opens up every corporate door. I'm actually quite sure that part's mostly flame. But sample size = 1, I've got no complaints with what it gives you, and if things don't work out I'll just bounce after two years.

[jzoffer456]

I am trying to split between bcg and gs 2L summer. Going to negotiate hard. If that doesn't work out, will probably work at Kirkland for 6 weeks and then gs for 10. Most law firms are very amenable to splitting with non-law organizations (especially if they deem it prestigious and that seems to make them want you more). However, if you want McK, you should probably stay there for their whole summer program. (I am not even telling my bank that I will be working for 6 weeks before their program starts).

Just curious why you're trying to fit in two demanding (banking & consulting) internships into one summer? Usually the point is to work for one company, get an offer and come back full time. If it's about picking up extra money, fair enough, but I don't get it from a career standpoint unless you're just trying to get exposure to more industries.

I don't think most MBA students know or care much about BigLaw prestige, much less what "V10" means. MBB/investment banking is obviously still seen as fairly prestigious, and (especially with MBB) even at the top schools there's no guarantee you will waltz into a position, but a lot of students tend to shoot for PE/HF/unicorn tech jobs as a first choice.

Banking unfortunately doesn't guarantee 100% offer. So have to hedge my odds somewhat. Also, obviously you make more money.

PE (KKR, TPG, etc) is most likely out for me (and any other who entered banking at an associate level w/o prior PE experience). These firms only hire/need analysts for intense lbo modelling and they generally don't pick up lateral from banks outside the entry and MD levels.

Also, I am KJD. So the business school situation does not apply. Came to law school too hastily and found out that I hated law and am trying to get out as quickly as I can.

[Anonymous User]

I am trying to split between bcg and gs 2L summer. Going to negotiate hard. If that doesn't work out, will probably work at Kirkland for 6 weeks and then gs for 10. Most law firms are very amenable to splitting with non-law organizations (especially if they deem it prestigious and that seems to make them want you more). However, if you want McK, you should probably stay there for their whole summer program. (I am not even telling my bank that I will be working for 6 weeks before their program starts).

Just curious why you're trying to fit in two demanding (banking & consulting) internships into one summer? Usually the point is to work for one company, get an offer and come back full time. If it's about picking up extra money, fair enough, but I don't get it from a career standpoint unless you're just trying to get exposure to more industries.

I don't think most MBA students know or care much about BigLaw prestige, much less what "V10" means. MBB/investment banking is obviously still seen as fairly prestigious, and (especially with MBB) even at the top schools there's no guarantee you will waltz into a position, but a lot of students tend to shoot for PE/HF/unicorn tech jobs as a first choice.

Banking unfortunately doesn't guarantee 100% offer. So have to hedge my odds somewhat. Also, obviously you make more money.

PE (KKR, TPG, etc) is most likely out for me (and any other who entered banking at an associate level w/o prior PE experience). These firms only hire/need analysts for intense lbo modelling and they generally don't pick up lateral from banks outside the entry and MD levels.

Also, I am KJD. So the business school situation does not apply. Came to law school too hastily and found out that I hated law and am trying to get out as quickly as I can.

Cool, makes total sense, was just curious. Good luck with that - if you're KJD it's not too late to work as a banking associate and head for an MBA later, even just as a "break" and switch to PE or whatever. One of the cool things about b school is that you find a lot of people were already working in really good jobs (not counting the ones where it's "expected" you go to b school after your first stint), even some in more senior positions including a handful in post-MBA bulge bracket or MBB, so it's almost ironic that the people most likely to go to business school are the ones who least need it purely for career options.