How does hiring committee make decisions? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I am curious about the procedures of the hiring committee meetings. Since interviewees generally meet with whichever attorneys that happen to be available at the time, do all those attorneys attend the meetings, or only their evaluations come into the meeting, and whoever is on the committee will read those and make decisions without actually meeting the candidates?

[12YrsAnAssociate]

I've only been involved a little, but basically some big wig partner says something good about a few people, and they get offers. Really high marks from junior interviewers don't seem to help at all.

It's really bizarre to see how the decision is made. Like one interviewee made an off the cuff "patent seems interesting too" comment, and it doomed her because there wasn't enough patent work at the time and the big wig apparently took the comment to mean that the interviewee would only be happy with patent work, and no one really cared enough to step in and correct him.

[Best]

I was on the committee at my last firm as a 3rd-4th year (recently lateraled). My opinion was pretty irrelevant unless I was bringing up something truly awful, like a racist comment I heard in passing, though I was always asked for my opinion (which, being on the committee, was different than your normal associate providing feedback post interview). I think there was only one time my opninion was truly relevant, and it was because I shared a niche hobby with a potential partner hire and he was clearly exaggerating and lying, which the rest of the committee did not like.

In general it's like the other comment said. Not all partners are equal, and many of them will follow the louder voices. You want to meet with and impress the loud voices, but you obviously don't know who they are and it's essentially luck as to who signs up to interview you.

Just know that in general:

hiring committee manager (if one exists) / practice group head of the relevant practice group > big shot partners > hiring commitee partners >>> partners >>>>>>>>>>>> hiring committee associates > associates.

Impress everyone and treat everyone like they matter, even the front desk.

[Anonymous User]

I was on the committee at my last firm as a 3rd-4th year (recently lateraled). My opinion was pretty irrelevant unless I was bringing up something truly awful, like a racist comment I heard in passing, though I was always asked for my opinion (which, being on the committee, was different than your normal associate providing feedback post interview). I think there was only one time my opninion was truly relevant, and it was because I shared a niche hobby with a potential partner hire and he was clearly exaggerating and lying, which the rest of the committee did not like.

In general it's like the other comment said. Not all partners are equal, and many of them will follow the louder voices. You want to meet with and impress the loud voices, but you obviously don't know who they are and it's essentially luck as to who signs up to interview you.

Just know that in general:

hiring committee manager (if one exists) / practice group head of the relevant practice group > big shot partners > hiring commitee partners >>> partners >>>>>>>>>>>> hiring committee associates > associates.

Impress everyone and treat everyone like they matter, even the front desk.

wow. Thanks for that. It looks like the hiring decisions are not really systematic and is determined by random things/luck/chemistry with the right persons.

[Best]

I was on the committee at my last firm as a 3rd-4th year (recently lateraled). My opinion was pretty irrelevant unless I was bringing up something truly awful, like a racist comment I heard in passing, though I was always asked for my opinion (which, being on the committee, was different than your normal associate providing feedback post interview). I think there was only one time my opninion was truly relevant, and it was because I shared a niche hobby with a potential partner hire and he was clearly exaggerating and lying, which the rest of the committee did not like.

In general it's like the other comment said. Not all partners are equal, and many of them will follow the louder voices. You want to meet with and impress the loud voices, but you obviously don't know who they are and it's essentially luck as to who signs up to interview you.

Just know that in general:

hiring committee manager (if one exists) / practice group head of the relevant practice group > big shot partners > hiring commitee partners >>> partners >>>>>>>>>>>> hiring committee associates > associates.

Impress everyone and treat everyone like they matter, even the front desk.

wow. Thanks for that. It looks like the hiring decisions are not really systematic and is determined by random things/luck/chemistry with the right persons.

It's designed to be systematic. The issue is that all partners are not equal. Some have powerful voices that let their opinions dominate discussions and voting. Same for promotion and bonus discussions. It really pays off to know the partners that will go to bat for the associates they work with. You just obviously can't do that at the hiring level (or at firms that aren't free market).

[nixy]

wow. Thanks for that. It looks like the hiring decisions are not really systematic and is determined by random things/luck/chemistry with the right persons.

That pretty much describes all hiring, though.

[Anonymous User]

I was on the committee at my last firm as a 3rd-4th year (recently lateraled). My opinion was pretty irrelevant unless I was bringing up something truly awful, like a racist comment I heard in passing, though I was always asked for my opinion (which, being on the committee, was different than your normal associate providing feedback post interview). I think there was only one time my opninion was truly relevant, and it was because I shared a niche hobby with a potential partner hire and he was clearly exaggerating and lying, which the rest of the committee did not like.

In general it's like the other comment said. Not all partners are equal, and many of them will follow the louder voices. You want to meet with and impress the loud voices, but you obviously don't know who they are and it's essentially luck as to who signs up to interview you.

Just know that in general:

hiring committee manager (if one exists) / practice group head of the relevant practice group > big shot partners > hiring commitee partners >>> partners >>>>>>>>>>>> hiring committee associates > associates.

Impress everyone and treat everyone like they matter, even the front desk.

wow. Thanks for that. It looks like the hiring decisions are not really systematic and is determined by random things/luck/chemistry with the right persons.

It's designed to be systematic. The issue is that all partners are not equal. Some have powerful voices that let their opinions dominate discussions and voting. Same for promotion and bonus discussions. It really pays off to know the partners that will go to bat for the associates they work with. You just obviously can't do that at the hiring level (or at firms that aren't free market).

Right that makes sense. I had an interview with four attorneys for a firm, and only one of them was partner in the group that I am most interested in joining. Do you think that that partner will have the final say on hiring during the committee meeting?

[Best]

I was on the committee at my last firm as a 3rd-4th year (recently lateraled). My opinion was pretty irrelevant unless I was bringing up something truly awful, like a racist comment I heard in passing, though I was always asked for my opinion (which, being on the committee, was different than your normal associate providing feedback post interview). I think there was only one time my opninion was truly relevant, and it was because I shared a niche hobby with a potential partner hire and he was clearly exaggerating and lying, which the rest of the committee did not like.

In general it's like the other comment said. Not all partners are equal, and many of them will follow the louder voices. You want to meet with and impress the loud voices, but you obviously don't know who they are and it's essentially luck as to who signs up to interview you.

Just know that in general:

hiring committee manager (if one exists) / practice group head of the relevant practice group > big shot partners > hiring commitee partners >>> partners >>>>>>>>>>>> hiring committee associates > associates.

Impress everyone and treat everyone like they matter, even the front desk.

wow. Thanks for that. It looks like the hiring decisions are not really systematic and is determined by random things/luck/chemistry with the right persons.

It's designed to be systematic. The issue is that all partners are not equal. Some have powerful voices that let their opinions dominate discussions and voting. Same for promotion and bonus discussions. It really pays off to know the partners that will go to bat for the associates they work with. You just obviously can't do that at the hiring level (or at firms that aren't free market).

Right that makes sense. I had an interview with four attorneys for a firm, and only one of them was partner in the group that I am most interested in joining. Do you think that that partner will have the final say on hiring during the committee meeting?

If it was only a practice group that you're interested in joining (versus the one you're going into and will be working with), then no.

But it doesn't matter. Stop worrying about things far outside of your control now (as useless advice as that is). Your resume was good enough to get you there, and the people who didn't interview with you aren't going to blindly reject you.

[nixy]

Right that makes sense. I had an interview with four attorneys for a firm, and only one of them was partner in the group that I am most interested in joining. Do you think that that partner will have the final say on hiring during the committee meeting?

There is no way to know this from the outside. Parsing this kind of thing isn’t productive because you just don’t have enough information. Stop worrying about it and move on.

[enibs]

Right that makes sense. I had an interview with four attorneys for a firm, and only one of them was partner in the group that I am most interested in joining. Do you think that that partner will have the final say on hiring during the committee meeting?

There is no way to know this from the outside. Parsing this kind of thing isn’t productive because you just don’t have enough information. Stop worrying about it and move on.

There’s always going to be some element of luck in the hiring process. If someone on your interview schedule really doesn’t like you, particularly if that person is on the hiring committee, you’re probably not getting an offer. Even if the other people you saw like you. Had you done your callback on a different day, and not seen that one person, you’d probably be getting an offer. Just accept the element of chance and focus on the firms where you did get offers.