Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Jun 09, 2021 7:42 pm

Shall we? Why not! Let's get it.

In this thread, we help one another put together suitable bidlists, share information, assuage fears, offer advice on interviews and callbacks, etc.

Past threads:
2021 (WIP, Class of '22): viewtopic.php?f=23&t=308092
2019: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=301793
2018: ?
2017: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=278460
2016: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=265024
2015: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=248971
2014: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=231040
2013: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=211338
2012: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=187757
2011: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=162163

Another good thread from this year with a good amount of CLS-specific advice: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=308119


Rules and tips:

I. Anonymous Handles

We all want to maintain some privacy during this process. That said, it is also nice to keep track of who is saying what. I recommend that everyone pick a handle with which to sign her anonymous posts (although you obviously don’t have to) so that we can keep track of one another.

II. Bidding

The basics of bidlist stuff should be straightforward even if you’re not Socrates: if you think other people are more likely to bid on a firm, you should bid it high. Firms that are less grade-selective or that have fewer interview spots are more competitive, so you should probably rank them higher. Don’t rank a firm high just because you want it, but if you really want a particular firm it might be good to rank it high for your peace of mind. The EIP Failed Bid Report helps with this, although relying too heavily on it could be a mistake (or so I've heard). Finally, spreading bids out between multiple markets increases the risk of striking out, especially if you don't have strong ties to those markets. We’ve all seen the data: there are just more jobs in New York, so NY is a solid backup for folks who are trying to head to California, Chicago, DC, etc.

III. Callbacks

Once we’re at least part-way through the first rings of interviewing hell, people will get callbacks. In past years, people would post the firm name and the initials of the person who interviewed them when they received a callback so that people would know that callbacks had gone out.

Good luck.

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Jun 09, 2021 8:40 pm

I went through EIP successfully within the last couple of years. Happy to answer any questions or offer advice.

-Harbinger

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Jun 09, 2021 9:49 pm

-Repost of good advice that students ignore at their own peril

Here's Mono's advice from previous years. It's good stuff.

Okay, here are some things to think about:

(A) Strikeouts are real, even if it doesn't feel that way because nobody talks about it IRL. It was 13% for c/o 2016, and that is not a meaningless number. Everyone thinks it won't happen to them, until it does. Therefore, your number one priority is to get a job. If it happens to be the specific one you were angling for, great. But the downside risk you create by angling towards the hard-to-reach is way, way, WAY larger than the upside risk of getting this firm instead of that firm.

(B) The top three reasons people strike out are, in order:

3. Bad grades--Hopefully you've made your peace with this one by now, because it isn't changing. Bad grades, of course, won't help your case. But CLS has a very strong placement record, and bottom-of-the-class grades do not make it impossible, or even unlikely, that you'll be able to get a Biglaw job. Be comforted with that knowledge, and move on to the things you can actually affect.

2. Bad interviewing--Some people have dynamite charisma. Because you read TLS, that isn't you. So get your ass to OCS and start doing practice interviewing. Do as many as you can until they stop letting you in the building. Email them until they let you in purely on the knowledge that you'll annoy them if they don't. I think I did like seven. If you're so inclined, go to outside consultants who do this for a living. It helps you with the two important skills of EIP: Giving scripted answers that sound like you just came up with them, and giving the consistent energy/enthusiasm that makes it look like you'll shit bricks for the opportunity to talk to Insert Firm Name Here. It's a skill, and just like most other skills, some people are more naturally inclined, but pretty much everyone can get better with practice. If you do a shitton, then by the time EIP rolls around there won't be any questions that you haven't heard before. If you're tremendously awkward, the interviews aren't going to turn you into Don Draper overnight, but they have a decent chance of making you passable enough to hire.

1. Bad bidding--This is the worst thing students do every year. Many, maybe most, of the people who strikeout from CLS are doing something other than the prudent play, which is to fill your schedule with large-class NYC firms. Anything else entails an unnecessary risk. It's up to you to decide how badly you want something that isn't that, and whether your specific situation is such that you can afford to take on some kind of risk. But a good rule of thumb if you want to minimize the probability of debtfucking your life is that non-Stone students should be bidding a minimum of 20 large-class NYC firms. Regardless of GPA, this should include all of the following, unless you have a seriously good reason not to bid one of the above: Cadwalader, Clifford Chance, Fried Frank, Greenberg Traurig, Hogan, K&L Gates, Kaye Scholer, Kramer Levin, Mayer Brown, Milbank, Paul Hastings, Proskauer, Schulte, Sidley, and Willkie. If you are at least median-ish, that list should also include Kirkland, Ropes, and Shearman. To focus on anything besides the firms most likely to hire you if you are non-Stone is a significant risk.


(C) Do as many interviews as you can. OCS told me and other students, and will probably tell you, that you should keep your schedule to no more than 20 or so. That's utter nonsense. There is no risk to doing more interviews and you should not be shutting the door to any opportunity. Yes, it will be tiring. Drink some goddamn coffee. I had two cups each day, and those of you with higher caffeine tolerances will need more. Doesn't matter; there are available pots in the reception area. I was so tired at the end of each day that I immediately crashed when I got home. But I didn't do any interviews with anything less than 100% enthusiasm. I had 28 after bidding and raced like a madman to pick up anything that fit my schedule. For several days I was checking literally every 15 minutes to see if anyone had dropped anything (you don't have to be quite that insane). In the end, one of my offers was from a firm I picked up late in the process. I was lucky to have two others before that, but you never know which one you pick up might be the difference between Biglaw and debtpwnage. In the end, it's something of a numbers game. Think in terms of probability. It's tremendously hard to predict which firms will like you and which won't. There is often not a lot of rhyme or reason as to why Firm A called you back and Firm B didn't. Think of more interviews as more free tickets to a raffle--why would you turn down a chance to increase your odds? I had very bad grades and I don't think I'm any more likable than the next guy, but I had six callbacks, just due to the sheer volume of interviews that I did.


(D) OCS' advice is frequently bad. Take everything they say with a grain of salt. TLS consistently gives better advice. Last year, OCS told one kid that he couldn't get Simpson with a 3.7 without WE. That's nonsense. They told another kid that if he really wanted Cravath, he should bid them in his top five. That's just demonstrably really inefficient. I'm sure there are other "gems" I've forgotten.


(E) I have always been really confused as to why the average student seems to get so few of their lottery bids. This is really not a hard process. People who get fewer than 25 of their bids are doing something wrong. The first failed bid stuff is remarkably consistent year-to-year. Look up where Firm X could not be had last year. Move it a few spots above that to account for variability. This is really so easy and yet so many people in the past have messed it up. Do not be like those people.

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Jun 09, 2021 10:51 pm

This is a direct violation of Columbia policy, so I go anonymous, but DO PRE-OCI. Weil does it, STB does it, other good firms do it, and it's how I got my current job. Makes OCI less stressful too to have an ofter in hand. If others disagree feel free to offer thoughts.

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 10, 2021 1:09 am

Regardless of GPA, this should include all of the following, unless you have a seriously good reason not to bid one of the above: Cadwalader, Clifford Chance, Fried Frank, Greenberg Traurig, Hogan, K&L Gates, Kaye Scholer, Kramer Levin, Mayer Brown, Milbank, Paul Hastings, Proskauer, Schulte, Sidley, and Willkie.
Not sure if this is outdated or was always wrong, but several of these firms do not have large NY classes (or at least large numbers of CLS offers), and several of them are absolutely not standard options for people unsure of what they want to do. Cadwalader, being almost all transactional and giving fewer offers than some DC shops, is a prime example. Use last year's EIP info to get a sense of which firms give the most offers.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:03 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jun 10, 2021 1:09 am
Regardless of GPA, this should include all of the following, unless you have a seriously good reason not to bid one of the above: Cadwalader, Clifford Chance, Fried Frank, Greenberg Traurig, Hogan, K&L Gates, Kaye Scholer, Kramer Levin, Mayer Brown, Milbank, Paul Hastings, Proskauer, Schulte, Sidley, and Willkie.
Not sure if this is outdated or was always wrong, but several of these firms do not have large NY classes (or at least large numbers of CLS offers), and several of them are absolutely not standard options for people unsure of what they want to do. Cadwalader, being almost all transactional and giving fewer offers than some DC shops, is a prime example. Use last year's EIP info to get a sense of which firms give the most offers.
It is outdated because this was originally written 7 years ago.

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:44 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:03 am
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jun 10, 2021 1:09 am
Regardless of GPA, this should include all of the following, unless you have a seriously good reason not to bid one of the above: Cadwalader, Clifford Chance, Fried Frank, Greenberg Traurig, Hogan, K&L Gates, Kaye Scholer, Kramer Levin, Mayer Brown, Milbank, Paul Hastings, Proskauer, Schulte, Sidley, and Willkie.
Not sure if this is outdated or was always wrong, but several of these firms do not have large NY classes (or at least large numbers of CLS offers), and several of them are absolutely not standard options for people unsure of what they want to do. Cadwalader, being almost all transactional and giving fewer offers than some DC shops, is a prime example. Use last year's EIP info to get a sense of which firms give the most offers.
It is outdated because this was originally written 7 years ago.
Another outdated point: FFB no longer seems ‘remarkably consistent’. Plenty of firms have been somewhat consistent, but anyone this year will notice some wild fluctuations over the past couple cycles at many firms.

I suppose the general point stands that we should rank our choices based on FFB (duh?) but it’s definitely not as cut and dry this year as that post would make it seem.

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 10, 2021 10:58 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 10:51 pm
This is a direct violation of Columbia policy, so I go anonymous, but DO PRE-OCI. Weil does it, STB does it, other good firms do it, and it's how I got my current job. Makes OCI less stressful too to have an ofter in hand. If others disagree feel free to offer thoughts.
Very good advice. Sullcrom does pre-OCI too and it’s how I got my job there. Much less stressful going into OCI with an offer or two already in your pocket.

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 10, 2021 11:25 am

What exactly is pre-OCI? Just emailing your resume out to random people at firms?

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 10, 2021 11:41 am

Did WIP and just two quick things:

1. FFB was wildly variable for us especially at the top of the list. I dropped DPW to bottom because it was too tight with GDC and I still got an interview with them because everyone did that. Make sure to give yourself a lot of room at must haves.

2. Lit is way more selective than corporate. I’m a lit associate at a V5 and partner told me the Corp to lit demand is as disparate as ever so there’s just more slots for people willing to do corporate work. All to say, low stone as a lit person isn’t gonna get you the firms it will as a not sure or corporate applicant.

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 10, 2021 12:26 pm

Milbank FFB
2018: 16
2019: 12
2021 WIP: 8
2021 EIP: 4 ???

User avatar
feminist.supporter

New
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2021 8:26 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by feminist.supporter » Thu Jun 10, 2021 12:41 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 10:51 pm
This is a direct violation of Columbia policy, so I go anonymous, but DO PRE-OCI. Weil does it, STB does it, other good firms do it, and it's how I got my current job. Makes OCI less stressful too to have an ofter in hand. If others disagree feel free to offer thoughts.
100% this.

Law students, remember this. If you never get caught, it's never illegal to begin with.

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 10, 2021 1:17 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jun 10, 2021 11:25 am
What exactly is pre-OCI? Just emailing your resume out to random people at firms?
Yes, find a recruiting contact and just start cold-emailing your resume and transcript with a brief email. I'm sure others have more elaborate ways of doing it, but I found pretty good success just doing that. And your grades will need to be a certain threshold, which is to say probably at least Stone, unless you have some other softs that come into play.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 10, 2021 5:54 pm

feminist.supporter wrote:
Thu Jun 10, 2021 12:41 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 10:51 pm
This is a direct violation of Columbia policy, so I go anonymous, but DO PRE-OCI. Weil does it, STB does it, other good firms do it, and it's how I got my current job. Makes OCI less stressful too to have an ofter in hand. If others disagree feel free to offer thoughts.
100% this.

Law students, remember this. If you never get caught, it's never illegal to begin with.
As someone who did get caught, OCS will be way more mad at the firm than at you, so.
ESPECIALLY if you're looking at any non-NY market (but particularly DC), DO PRE-OCI.

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 10, 2021 9:52 pm

Anon, since I don't want to reveal autobiographical information on my TLS account. Some recent thoughts, based on my fairly-painless EIP process. [Mods - just delete this post if you won't keep it anonymous.]

(1) Your bidlist should not be based on your "favorite" firms. It should be based your grades ("Am I Stone?") and the first-failed bid data. What I'd do is: (a) get an Excel spreadsheet with the complete firm info and FFB, (b) delete all the firms I realistically do not have the grades for and that aren't in my target market, (c) add 2-3 to the first-failed bid from last year. That was my starting template. From there, I'd prioritize large class sizes over small. Then cut a few very popular firms to give myself some breathing room. (You can try to pick those interviews up at EIP, via pre-OCI, etc.)

"But Anon," you might ask, "that seems so obvious, doesn't everyone do that? How could that possibly work?" I dunno. It did my year? It did the year before? People are dumb?

(2) Schedule a LOT of screeners. Seriously. Not 15. 25+. There is no reason to not take the screener unless it is literally impossible because it conflicts with another screener on your schedule.

"But I don't want to do so many interviews, they give me anxiety/stress/etc." Do you have Kent/a 3.7+? OK, then you don't have to. Are you a URM who's Stone? OK, you probably don't have to. (And you probably already have a 1L SA.)

Otherwise, schedule the screeners.

(3) You probably shouldn't target DC. Don't target DC unless you (a) have ties to DC, or (b) are a super-high-demand candidate (URM/very good grades/both). Bid NY. There aren't a lot of DC firms, and they don't hire a ton of Columbia people anyway. I had fairly social friends with very, very good grades and 1L SAs who completely struck out. Do not be the person with the 3.4, from the NY area, that went to an Ivy and worked for 2 years in NYC, targeting Covington/Hogan/whatever to do litigation because you're interested in politics. Historically, they're not interested.

(4) Interviews are all the same. Just prepare beforehand. "Why'd I go to law school?" "Why'd I go to Columbia?" "What are my favorite classes/professors?" "Talk about XYZ work experience." "What are my long-term plans?" "Why XYZ Firm?" "Litigation or corporate?" "Talk about a time that was challenging." "Do I have any questions for XYZ interviewer?"

It's small-talk for 20 minutes. The only thing they're looking for is (a) is this person weird as fuck, (b) does this person seem like someone that could function in a professional workplace for 10 weeks, and (c) is this person interested in working here.

The bar is extremely low--if you've prepared a bit (practice interviews, writing out bullet-point answers to the above questions and giving them to a mirror). If you're weird/have never done professional interviews before, prepare a bit.

And then smile a lot and say inoffensive things. Act like you want to be there and it will be a breeze.

(5) If you're a weaker candidate and can imagine doing corporate, bid it/say you're interested if people ask. Would strongly, strongly recommend non-diverse people that aren't at least Stone signal corporate. It's a more profitable practice, firms generally get less interest in it from summers, and the best-credentialed lawyers are disproportionately litigation-interested. They're gonna tell you it doesn't matter, and that's just not true. Most firms don't have problems getting litigation juniors (and midlevels - they can hire clerks). They want corporate juniors.

If your heart is absolutely set on litigation, ok. But you're materially hurting your chances at BigLaw, that's just the reality.

Like, to give a harsh example: If you're a non-URM male that went to Ohio State (or w/e) for undergrad and is low Stone (let alone not-Stone), and you go into your Paul, Weiss NY interview telling them you want to do white collar litigation because your dream is to become an AUSA ... you're probably not getting a callback.

Not saying that's fair. But it's how firms work.

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Jun 11, 2021 7:13 am

Confirming everything in the above post.

-Harbinger

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Jun 11, 2021 1:27 pm

How's everyone's bidlists looking?
40 slots is so many to fill

- Leo

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Jun 11, 2021 3:48 pm

CLS alum.

Anon's list above is generally solid. But I would emphasize that these aren't really interviews, they're conversations. Your resume says if you can hack it. Interviewers want to see:

1: are you, like, atrociously weird? (if so, no hire. very low bar.)
2: did you do the bare minimum due diligence to not embarass yourself? (having basic "why you want to be a lawyer," "why firm X," etc answers)
3: how would I feel about doing an all-night closing with you?

to that end it's a really good interview if you spend most of the time talking about the Yankees or hiking or whatever. if it's all q&a that's not great. if it's all very formal / no connections, that's not great.

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Jun 11, 2021 4:03 pm

Anyone get Pre EIP screeners or callbacks yet?

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Jun 11, 2021 4:10 pm

Anon that wrote list. [Again, mods, please leave Anon and delete if you don't want to.]

Agree that should be natural/conversational. I'd just encourage people to practice/get comfortable answering these questions so that when they go into the interview they do'nt get blind-sided and freeze up.

Just from experience, seems like the most uncomfortable interviews are the ones where the interviewee wasn't expecting/hasn't thought about the question. (I say that as someone who's been in position of asking question and giving the answer ... )

law69hehehe

New
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 7:41 pm

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by law69hehehe » Thu Jun 17, 2021 12:30 pm

Any advice for saying why we want to do corporate/transactional if we're KJD and haven't had work experience at a bank/company/law firm before?

Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.

Register now, it's still FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 17, 2021 3:51 pm

law69hehehe wrote:
Thu Jun 17, 2021 12:30 pm
Any advice for saying why we want to do corporate/transactional if we're KJD and haven't had work experience at a bank/company/law firm before?
Do you want to do corporate/transactional? If you have had no professional exposure to it, I would not say you want to do it; interviewers may think you do not know what you are talking about (which is probably the case). I would say that you are open to it (if you are simply trying to improve your odds of getting hired given need for corp associates) or that you are interested in it (if you truly are); interviewers do not presuppose any deep knowledge of the field. Some reasons you can provide:
  • Client dynamics--you enjoy working collaboratively, you like the idea of working toward a concrete goal that all involved want to accomplish, etc.
  • Skill set--you work well as a teammate, you have attention to detail, etc.
  • Interest in exploring the field--despite basically being committed to lit, my corp interviewers (at full-service firms) ate up my responses that acknowledged law school is all lit focused, at least 1L. Admitting I knew nothing about corp work in practice but wanted to explore it given whatever other reasons I gave went over really well.
  • Any substantive interest in particular fields. These responses will be stronger if you have something to point to (e.g., a parent in real estate; a friend in sports/entertainment that deals with contracts). It may come across as ridiculous to say you are interested in capital markets or real estate if you cannot point to concrete, personal things. I made sure NEVER to overplay my hand or feign interest that I could not at least somewhat substantiate.
-Harbinger

Anonymous User
Posts: 372933
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Jun 17, 2021 4:50 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jun 17, 2021 3:51 pm
law69hehehe wrote:
Thu Jun 17, 2021 12:30 pm
Any advice for saying why we want to do corporate/transactional if we're KJD and haven't had work experience at a bank/company/law firm before?
Do you want to do corporate/transactional? If you have had no professional exposure to it, I would not say you want to do it; interviewers may think you do not know what you are talking about (which is probably the case). I would say that you are open to it (if you are simply trying to improve your odds of getting hired given need for corp associates) or that you are interested in it (if you truly are); interviewers do not presuppose any deep knowledge of the field. Some reasons you can provide:
  • Client dynamics--you enjoy working collaboratively, you like the idea of working toward a concrete goal that all involved want to accomplish, etc.
  • Skill set--you work well as a teammate, you have attention to detail, etc.
  • Interest in exploring the field--despite basically being committed to lit, my corp interviewers (at full-service firms) ate up my responses that acknowledged law school is all lit focused, at least 1L. Admitting I knew nothing about corp work in practice but wanted to explore it given whatever other reasons I gave went over really well.
  • Any substantive interest in particular fields. These responses will be stronger if you have something to point to (e.g., a parent in real estate; a friend in sports/entertainment that deals with contracts). It may come across as ridiculous to say you are interested in capital markets or real estate if you cannot point to concrete, personal things. I made sure NEVER to overplay my hand or feign interest that I could not at least somewhat substantiate.
-Harbinger
Highly credited, this was my experience interviewing too.

The only other factor I'd add to Harbinger's list is pace — you can talk about your impression of corp work as "fast-paced," and "dynamic," and "different every day." Corporate-side interviewers seem to gobble that stuff up, even though it sounds banal and clichéd.

Talking about how you follow the financial press (WSJ, FT, The Economist, etc.), and how you "like learning the inner workings of how a business operates" yadda yadda yadda ... assuming you're not lying through your teeth, those can help substantiate an interest in corporate work, as well.

-Limoncello

law69hehehe

New
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2020 7:41 pm

Re: Columbia Law EIP 2021 (Class of '23)

Post by law69hehehe » Thu Jun 17, 2021 5:07 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jun 17, 2021 4:50 pm
Anonymous User wrote:
Thu Jun 17, 2021 3:51 pm
law69hehehe wrote:
Thu Jun 17, 2021 12:30 pm
Any advice for saying why we want to do corporate/transactional if we're KJD and haven't had work experience at a bank/company/law firm before?
Do you want to do corporate/transactional? If you have had no professional exposure to it, I would not say you want to do it; interviewers may think you do not know what you are talking about (which is probably the case). I would say that you are open to it (if you are simply trying to improve your odds of getting hired given need for corp associates) or that you are interested in it (if you truly are); interviewers do not presuppose any deep knowledge of the field. Some reasons you can provide:
  • Client dynamics--you enjoy working collaboratively, you like the idea of working toward a concrete goal that all involved want to accomplish, etc.
  • Skill set--you work well as a teammate, you have attention to detail, etc.
  • Interest in exploring the field--despite basically being committed to lit, my corp interviewers (at full-service firms) ate up my responses that acknowledged law school is all lit focused, at least 1L. Admitting I knew nothing about corp work in practice but wanted to explore it given whatever other reasons I gave went over really well.
  • Any substantive interest in particular fields. These responses will be stronger if you have something to point to (e.g., a parent in real estate; a friend in sports/entertainment that deals with contracts). It may come across as ridiculous to say you are interested in capital markets or real estate if you cannot point to concrete, personal things. I made sure NEVER to overplay my hand or feign interest that I could not at least somewhat substantiate.
-Harbinger
Highly credited, this was my experience interviewing too.

The only other factor I'd add to Harbinger's list is pace — you can talk about your impression of corp work as "fast-paced," and "dynamic," and "different every day." Corporate-side interviewers seem to gobble that stuff up, even though it sounds banal and clichéd.

Talking about how you follow the financial press (WSJ, FT, The Economist, etc.), and how you "like learning the inner workings of how a business operates" yadda yadda yadda ... assuming you're not lying through your teeth, those can help substantiate an interest in corporate work, as well.

-Limoncello
I'm genuinely interested in corporate, so it's really helpful to have reasons other than "better exit opps down the line." Based advice, thanks Limoncello and Harbinger.

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “Legal Employment”