Interviewers for in firms

[Law_Student_X]

For the people they schedule your in firms with and with regards to their level (associate, partner, managing partner, etc) does it mean anything as to who they scheduled you with? If it's higher level people, is the firm more interested in you? Will everyone meet with the managing partner on Day 1?

Or am I looking too much into it haha.

[OzLaw16]

This likely varies between firms. At my firm, for example, every candidate’s first day of interviews is intentionally set up to have the same combination of partners, associates, student committee members, etc. as every other candidate. So in many cases, reading into who you’re interviewing with (particularly on Day 1) would be overthinking. I’m sure there’s some firms that are more blatant about giving different kinds of schedules to candidates that are higher up on their priority list, but it’s pretty much impossible to know going in which firms take that approach, so there’s still no point overthinking it. 
 

Although not directly related to your question, I’d also offer this general advice: don’t make the mistake of assuming that someone with a higher rank within the firm is automatically someone you need to “impress more” than the people with lower ranks. I’d argue that a candidate who interviews with an associate that’s really engaged and invested in the process has a better chance of making a strong impression than a candidate who interviews with a partner who’s too busy to truly care about the process and is only doing a few interviews because they feel like they have to. I would strongly recommended treating all of your interviewers as though they’re the biggest decision-maker because you have very little way of knowing who’s going to be the most vocal when it comes time to provide feedback on candidates!

To address your last question, I’d be extremely surprised if any firm out there is having their managing partner meet one-on-one with a ton of candidates on Day 1 of interviews. I interviewed with a few managing partners on the last day of in-firm week, but none on Day 1. Managing partners are way too busy to dedicate an entire day to meeting candidates, and they honestly have way less influence over the hiring process than one might assume. 

[Jaggers]

There are also a lot of changes on the fly. A lawyer is not going to tell an important client that they can't meet for three days, so they'll find someone to sub in for the interview. I wouldn't read in that much at all for first interviews. When you come back, most firms do make an effort to have you meet with relatively senior lawyers in the areas of interest you've identified, but even that can be hard, as senior lawyers tend to be pretty busy...

For many students, those three days of interviews are the peak of the year. For lawyers, those three days can be exciting, but are also a somewhat annoying imposition on your time that has to be worked around.

Our managing partner had no influence on the hiring process. We had a committee of people that was picked to do that so that he didn't have to worry about it.

[Law_Student_X]

Thank you both for your answers! It seems the managing partner thing doesn't mean as much as I thought, but, is meeting with one Day 1 still a good sign? 

A quick side bar question I've thought of from both your answers - do firms have an aforementioned priority list going into in firms? Is it safe to say there are some candidates firms want a bit more after OCIs - or is everyone treated on the same level?

 

Edited November 4, 2022 by Law_Student_X

[lawfacade123]

In my experience, the managing partner interview was used to signal interest in me as a candidate. I definitely took it as a good sign. The size of the firm might be relevant to that though. If it's a smaller firm/office the managing partner might have to be involved as a default and might meet with everyone. For the larger firms, I felt like it was something they pulled out later in the process to signal interest. 

I have no doubt the firm is interested in some people more than others going into in-firms. I believe they would have some kind of ranking system behind the scenes. Granted, things can easily change as you go through in firms.

[Turtles]

I know at one big Bay St firm they brought out the Managing Partner for a Day 3 lunch event and everyone in attendance received an offer. But if it was a smaller firm, especially a boutique but maybe even a mid-sized, I wouldn't read too much into it. Sometimes the Managing Partner just wants to be part of the process, sometimes they're a prop to express interest. 

Edited November 4, 2022 by Turtles

[OzLaw16]

2 hours ago, Law_Student_X said:

A quick side bar question I've thought of from both your answers - do firms have an aforementioned priority list going into in firms? Is it safe to say there are some candidates firms want a bit more after OCIs - or is everyone treated on the same level?

 

I’d say probably yes for most big firms, but with a big caveat that any “list” a firm makes is definitely subject to change as in-firms progress. Firms might have some initial sense of who they’d rather hire before in-firms start, but the interviews themselves truly can make a big difference. Firms don’t just lock in their desired choices after OCIs and use in-firms solely to ensure their locked choices aren’t antisocial bigots. Strong candidates can absolutely fall during the process, and weaker candidates can absolutely rise. 
 

So the message is basically the same as my last post: try not to overthink this stuff too much, and instead just go into every interview as if it’s the most important one. Firms/student committees will absolutely take notice if a candidate appears too overconfident.

As a last note, I’ll just say for the sake of transparency that I’m not on the student committee for my firm, so these are my best guesses based on my experiences hosting interviews and from conversations I’ve had with our student committee and student recruiter. People who have served on student committees before will likely have more information. 

[Pantalaimon]

3 hours ago, lawfacade123 said:

I have no doubt the firm is interested in some people more than others going into in-firms. I believe they would have some kind of ranking system behind the scenes. Granted, things can easily change as you go through in firms.

Our committee has a policy not to do this so that we focus on how the interviews went. Stuff from your application will come up later on (e.g. grades), obviously some candidates are simply better than others, but it's probably better to think of in-firms as a clean slate.