Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=308802
Best wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:29 pmI 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.
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).Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 3:05 pmBest wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:29 pmI 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.
That pretty much describes all hiring, though.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 3:05 pmwow. 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.
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 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 3:10 pmIt'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).Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 3:05 pmBest wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:29 pmI 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.
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.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 3:33 pmRight 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 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 3:10 pmIt'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).Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 3:05 pmBest wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:29 pmI 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.
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.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 3:33 pmRight 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’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.nixy wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 4:35 pmThere 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.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 3:33 pmRight 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?