OCI, what the heck? Forum

[Tanicius]

Also, one of the big differences between ITE and pre-ITE is number of callbacks. Medianish (middle 50%) people at lower T14 used to get 5+. Now, 2-3 is pretty typical depending on interview skills. Statistically, you can expect 2-3 callbacks to turn into an offer, but it can be somewhat random.

My observaion is that even if most of the class still gets big law, only the top 1/3 or so of the class piles on the callbacks while the rest eke out an offer from 2-3.

This is spot on based on what I have seen. This year may actually be tougher than last. Maybe firms over hired again last year (not like pre-ITE, but maybe still over projected by a bit).

Seriously? This is really surprising to me. Everyone seems to have a ton or zero, with very few exceptions. Virtually everyone I know who's gotten callbacks has at least half a dozen. I'm lagging way behind at two. A friend of mine has one.

It's pretty normal to get the sense that OCI is feast or famine.

That's what I expected. That's why I think it's weird that someone would say it's normal to have "2-3 callbacks," which strikes me as decidedly in the middle between feast and famine.

[IAFG]

That's what I expected. That's why I think it's weird that someone would say it's normal to have "2-3 callbacks," which strikes me as decidedly in the middle between feast and famine.

I am saying, that's a normal perception to have, but the reality is that many people will only have a couple callbacks. I had the same perception about grades; seemed like a bunch of people were top 10% and a handful of people were bottom 1/3 and I didn't hear much from the people in between.

[rayiner]

That's what I expected. That's why I think it's weird that someone would say it's normal to have "2-3 callbacks," which strikes me as decidedly in the middle between feast and famine.

You have to wait for things to shake out, man.

[EvilClinton]

I am going to have to agree about the feast or famine number of CBs that seem to be going out this year at T14s.

So far I have 4 friends that have 5+ callbacks, 2 friends with 1, and 2 friends with 0. It seems like either you got a ton or you are SOL.

[Sheffield]

That's what I expected. That's why I think it's weird that someone would say it's normal to have "2-3 callbacks," which strikes me as decidedly in the middle between feast and famine.

You have to wait for things to shake out, man.

My T14 median scoreboard as of tonight. So far 34 screeners, 3 callbacks. 8% callback = not necessary to erect a trophy case.

Not exactly breaking news but I it is apparent that median is not a great place to be these days. I had 2 screeners enthusiastically say (as in suddenly volunteering without prodding) that they were putting me in for a callback. They most likely did. . . dinged anyway.

Hard for me to gauge if those with high grades are knocking it out of the park. People tend not to brag when they read how others are struggling (especially on the school’s private forum).

[sparty99]

25 screening interviews and 2 call backs? You need to interview better.

[LSATNightmares]

Since you said you were concentrating on the SF/SV market... I think that market is super competitive. Be thankful you have at least two... I'm from a T-30, and I'm scared to death I'll get 0 in SF/SV (OCI has not happened yet for us).

[IAFG]

25 screening interviews and 2 call backs? You need to interview better.

In a lottery school, this doesn't say anything about a certain person's interviewing.

[Sheffield]

25 screening interviews and 2 call backs? You need to interview better.

In a lottery school, this doesn't say anything about a certain person's interviewing.

Speaking of the lottery. Getting set for another round of after lunch screenings, obtained from the lottery. In checking around Top Law School I saw where a couple of these firms dinged students from Harvard, so this day will probably not end well.

[ambiTTTTion]

Why is it surprising that some people get a ton of callback while others only get 1-2 if any? Each interview is a discrete event, therefore if you are great, you get it, if not, no callback. Being 60% as good as someone else will not yield 60% of the callbacks that the other person received, since they were only 60% as good in each individual interview.

[EvilClinton]

Why is it surprising that some people get a ton of callback while others only get 1-2 if any? Each interview is a discrete event, therefore if you are great, you get it, if not, no callback. Being 60% as good as someone else will not yield 60% of the callbacks that the other person received, since they were only 60% as good in each individual interview.

LOL at thinking what happens in a screening interview matters.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

Why is it surprising that some people get a ton of callback while others only get 1-2 if any? Each interview is a discrete event, therefore if you are great, you get it, if not, no callback. Being 60% as good as someone else will not yield 60% of the callbacks that the other person received, since they were only 60% as good in each individual interview.

LOL at thinking what happens in a screening interview matters.

Um, it does. Don't spread dumb ideas.

[Icculus]

Why is it surprising that some people get a ton of callback while others only get 1-2 if any? Each interview is a discrete event, therefore if you are great, you get it, if not, no callback. Being 60% as good as someone else will not yield 60% of the callbacks that the other person received, since they were only 60% as good in each individual interview.

LOL at thinking what happens in a screening interview matters.

Um, it does. Don't spread dumb ideas.

In a lottery school it still doesn't matter as much as what's on the resume.

[Sheffield]

LOL at thinking what happens in a screening interview matters.

I agree. It is essentially grades. At median you could perform magic tricks and bring out the dancing ducks and it wouldn’t matter much. However, if your grades are borderline for a particular firm, a good interview might prove helpful. In the end the outcome rests in the hands of decision makers you may never meet.

[bdubs]

Why is it surprising that some people get a ton of callback while others only get 1-2 if any? Each interview is a discrete event, therefore if you are great, you get it, if not, no callback. Being 60% as good as someone else will not yield 60% of the callbacks that the other person received, since they were only 60% as good in each individual interview.

LOL at thinking what happens in a screening interview matters.

Um, it does. Don't spread dumb ideas.

In a lottery school it still doesn't matter as much as what's on the resume.

Once you're above the cutoff I think the interview matters. I've been rejected at places where people with worse grades have gotten CBs and vice-versa.

[glitter178]

If screening interviews didn't matter *at all*, then people would never get CBs at their reach firms.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

Why is it surprising that some people get a ton of callback while others only get 1-2 if any? Each interview is a discrete event, therefore if you are great, you get it, if not, no callback. Being 60% as good as someone else will not yield 60% of the callbacks that the other person received, since they were only 60% as good in each individual interview.

LOL at thinking what happens in a screening interview matters.

Um, it does. Don't spread dumb ideas.

In a lottery school it still doesn't matter as much as what's on the resume.

I agree that at lottery schools the screening interview matters less than preselect schools. But it still matters. And the screening interviewing can be very important at schools that do preselect. To think it doesn't matter at either, and that OCI/legal hiring is a repeat of applying to law schools is just stupid and an idea that shouldn't be spread around.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

LOL at thinking what happens in a screening interview matters.

I agree. It is essentially grades. At median you could perform magic tricks and bring out the dancing ducks and it wouldn’t matter much. However, if your grades are borderline for a particular firm, a good interview might prove helpful. In the end the outcome rests in the hands of decision makers you may never meet.

A few things:
-So at a NYC firm with an 80-100 person summer class, yes, what you're saying makes some sense.
-What you're saying is not applicable to satellite offices that take smaller classes or boutiques. In that case, it's not a choice between median kid and good-grade kid. It's a choice between a ton of great-grades kids (and what counts as "great" is going to vary based on the school and how much that firm values bringing in top schools versus top grades). While for many NYC firms you just need to have acceptable grades and not stand out in a negative way, for smaller classes you need to stand out in a positive way. That could be something from your resume, but your screening interview and then callback interview will be an important part of the process.

[Icculus]

Once you're above the cutoff I think the interview matters. I've been rejected at places where people with worse grades have gotten CBs and vice-versa.

I agree 100% with this. My point was merely that if you have a lottery interview and not the GPA the interview will unlikely lead to a cb. But yes, once you meet the GPA the interview can make a difference.

[rayiner]

Why is it surprising that some people get a ton of callback while others only get 1-2 if any? Each interview is a discrete event, therefore if you are great, you get it, if not, no callback. Being 60% as good as someone else will not yield 60% of the callbacks that the other person received, since they were only 60% as good in each individual interview.

LOL at thinking what happens in a screening interview matters.

What happens in a screening interview definitely matters. There are no firms that just take the 10 highest GPAs from the pile and call it a day. For most firms, there is a substantial range between auto-callback and auto-ding GPA's, and at many firms there is no auto-callback GPA.

There are grade ranges in which interviews are a formality at most V100 NY firms. Top 10%+LR is going to be an auto-callback, and bottom 1/3 is going to be an auto-ding, barring exceptional circumstances, of course. But that leaves a large swath of the class for whom interviewing means the difference between 7 callbacks and 0. And interviewing isn't just a binary thing. It means really connecting with the interviewer. There are lots of places where I didn't get callbacks, but at places I did, the screening interviewer remembered our conversation weeks ago. Obviously, the better your grades the better your first impression, but screening interviewers exercise a lot of discretion within the firms parameters. And st many firms they're also your advocate in front of the hiring committee throughout the callback stage.

[EvilClinton]

Why is it surprising that some people get a ton of callback while others only get 1-2 if any? Each interview is a discrete event, therefore if you are great, you get it, if not, no callback. Being 60% as good as someone else will not yield 60% of the callbacks that the other person received, since they were only 60% as good in each individual interview.

LOL at thinking what happens in a screening interview matters.

What happens in a screening interview definitely matters. There are no firms that just take the 10 highest GPAs from the pile and call it a day. For most firms, there is a substantial range between auto-callback and auto-ding GPA's, and at many firms there is no auto-callback GPA.

There are grade ranges in which interviews are a formality at most V100 NY firms. Top 10%+LR is going to be an auto-callback, and bottom 1/3 is going to be an auto-ding, barring exceptional circumstances, of course. But that leaves a large swath of the class for whom interviewing means the difference between 7 callbacks and 0. And interviewing isn't just a binary thing. It means really connecting with the interviewer. There are lots of places where I didn't get callbacks, but at places I did, the screening interviewer remembered our conversation weeks ago. Obviously, the better your grades the better your first impression, but screening interviewers exercise a lot of discretion within the firms parameters. And st many firms they're also your advocate in front of the hiring committee throughout the callback stage.

I guess I should have qualified it by saying it really doesn't matter at schools that use lottery. They only get to see 25-50 (maybe more if is a is a huge office) or so students per office and the chances of all of those kids making the great cutoff are slim. So usually they call back all the people within their grade cut-offs that weren't complete weirdos.

It is different at schools with pre-select systems and firms approach the process differently.

[EvilClinton]

Why is it surprising that some people get a ton of callback while others only get 1-2 if any? Each interview is a discrete event, therefore if you are great, you get it, if not, no callback. Being 60% as good as someone else will not yield 60% of the callbacks that the other person received, since they were only 60% as good in each individual interview.

LOL at thinking what happens in a screening interview matters.

Um, it does. Don't spread dumb ideas.

If it is a lottery selected interview then I really don't think it does. At that point you can only screw it up. No matter what your connection is with the interviewer, if they don't like what is on the transcript/resume you aren't getting a call back.

That is the reality of ITE.

[EvilClinton]

I feel like the logic in this forum is slightly off. Sheffield didn't exchange a scholarship for 25 screeners and 2 callbacks. He or she could have had that (or better) at a tier 2 school. I go to a second tier school (which is now technically third tier) in Philly and did about 25 screeners and 9 callbacks last year. 0Ls shouldn't assume there is a direct correlation between school rank and interviews. It all depends on your target market and I personally think if you do extremely well at any school you'll be set as long as you're relatively normal.

I love it when people who did well come into a thread and humble brag about how well they did.

You are the exception, not the rule!

Statistically, 95% of your class did much worse than you and did not have any where near the number of screaners and callbacks you had. OP went to a better schools so he could have access to more firms regardless of his grades. Obviously if the OP was in the top 1% of his class at the T14 he would not be in this situation. But the point is that no one knows how they will do in law school ahead of time. Even you had no idea how you would perform until you got that first set of grades back.

[IAFG]

I feel like the logic in this forum is slightly off. Sheffield didn't exchange a scholarship for 25 screeners and 2 callbacks. He or she could have had that (or better) at a tier 2 school. I go to a second tier school (which is now technically third tier) in Philly and did about 25 screeners and 9 callbacks last year. 0Ls shouldn't assume there is a direct correlation between school rank and interviews. It all depends on your target market and I personally think if you do extremely well at any school you'll be set as long as you're relatively normal.

I love it when people who did well come into a thread and humble brag about how well they did.

You are the exception, not the rule!

Statistically, 95% of your class did much worse than you and did not have any where near the number of screaners and callbacks you had. OP went to a better schools so he could have access to more firms regardless of his grades. Obviously if the OP was in the top 1% of his class at the T14 he would not be in this situation. But the point is that no one knows how they will do in law school ahead of time. Even you had no idea how you would perform until you got that first set of grades back.

I agree that going to a top school gives you more access to firms. All I'm saying is that applicants shouldn't assume that by going to a top school they'll increase the amount of interviews they'll get. I'm not trying to brag. I'm trying to give honest information to applicants. It's better to go to a school for a full ride if it's an area you'd like to work and hope you do well than pay full price for a top school and hope you do well because no school guarantees you a job. That's just my opinion. At least a full ride guarantees you no debt.

Your opinion is stupid and appears to be at least partially based on a misunderstanding of lottery interviews.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

Why is it surprising that some people get a ton of callback while others only get 1-2 if any? Each interview is a discrete event, therefore if you are great, you get it, if not, no callback. Being 60% as good as someone else will not yield 60% of the callbacks that the other person received, since they were only 60% as good in each individual interview.

LOL at thinking what happens in a screening interview matters.

Um, it does. Don't spread dumb ideas.

If it is a lottery selected interview then I really don't think it does. At that point you can only screw it up. No matter what your connection is with the interviewer, if they don't like what is on the transcript/resume you aren't getting a call back.

That is the reality of ITE.

You're not quite getting it. I already mentioned this in a past post, but for non-NYC firms, this logic is just wrong. There are more good candidates than there are callback spots to offices who aren't taking a ~100 SA class for the summer. To talk more about some of the offices I have some knowledge about: Telling T14 student trying to get a callback at Dallas office for Gibson Dunn or Weil or Houston offices for Skadden or Latham that their screening interviews don't matter at all is absolutely wrong--those screening interviews matter a whole freaking lot since they're smaller offices. Even for medium sized offices they will still matter. Yes, for larger offices, it might not matter as much--but you still can blow your chance at a callback by sticking out in a negative way.