Mock Interview Season
Law students help illustrate what experienced inside counsel should, and should not, do in an interview
September 16, 2010 at 08:00 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
On campus interviewing (“OCI”) season at law schools used to be a fun exercise for employers and students alike. Partners at major law firms enjoyed visiting former stomping grounds and spreading “call back” offers to law students with good grades who showed up on time for their interviews. Students at top 20 law schools, and often beyond, enjoyed freedom of choice. One could even try a summer associate position in a new city, knowing that home city options would still be available after graduation.
Of course, that's all ancient history. The percentage of law students who secure jobs via OCI will go down again for the third straight year. Law school career services offices, once viewed as cushy corners within the legal profession, are under tremendous pressure to improve OCI results. The main emphasis is placed on wooing additional employers to campus. In fact, my prediction that large in-house legal departments will engage in entry level hiring is already coming true. Granted, the raw numbers for in-house entry level hiring are still small.
The other strategy for improving OCI results is to truly prepare students for the experience. I now serve three law schools that engage me for a few days in September to conduct mock interviews with students. I role play any one of multiple employer types, depending on the school's profile and student preference. Then I provide individual coaching to improve interview performance.
I believe this exercise also improves interviewing advice that I offer to you, the experienced inside counsel. I am reminded that enthusiasm and self-confidence rule in any interview situation, and that lack of either can kill or stall the most qualified of candidacies. Hesitant answers, poor eye contact, and apologies for nothing in particular are somewhat common in student interviews – and I assure you that I am a teddy bear of an interviewer. Some of these sessions can be downright painful. By comparison, when I get a young adult who exudes energy and self esteem, I find myself going above and beyond the mock interview to help that person.
Another hopefully helpful observation for you is what I term “anticipating needs.” In the mock interview context, students are given details on fictional employers. If grading, those students who make no use of this information get a C or D. Students who parrot a fact or two from the prep material would get a B. At least they demonstrate a willingness to prepare. The A goes to students who turn the prep material into a pitch for how he or she can add value to the firm/company. I even had one student in a mock law firm scenario explain how he could apply his Facebook and Twitter acumen to my business development efforts. That's an A+.
For experienced inside counsel, anticipating needs is where you will stand out from sophisticated peers who are also presenting themselves with enthusiasm and confidence. Offer your potential new boss the priceless gift of taking work off his or her plate. Explain why your learning curve will be short. Always think in terms of what the employer might want. Send the message that you truly want the opportunity at hand.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBallooning Workloads, Dearth of Advancement Opportunities Prime In-House Attorneys to Pull Exit Hatch
The Reason a GC Abruptly Departs May Not Be What You Think
Trending Stories
- 1Steve Bannon 'We Build The Wall' Fraud Trial Pushed to February 2025
- 2'Nuclear Option'?: Eli Lilly Taps Big Law Firms in Federal Drug Pricing Dispute
- 3Questions About Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act Remain Unanswered
- 4Santa Clara County Superior Court Authorizes Electronic Recording of Proceedings
- 5Ex-Deputy AG Trusts U.S. Legal System To Pull Country Through Times of Duress
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250