TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[Ram Sabaratnam]

Hi Ram! I was wondering how you would structure the SWOT analysis. Would you recommend using short bullet points, a paragraph for each Swot portion, or a mixture of both (i.e. bullet point + 1-2 sentences)?

Thanks in advance!

Hiya @Bloo!

I’d say the way you format the analysis will depend on what you're being asked to do (whether it's for a formal memo, an internal note, or even a client-facing email) but in general, I’d recommend using a mixture of subheadings, bullet points, and short explanatory paragraphs to make it both clear and easy to follow. The key is to avoid overwhelming the reader with long blocks of text, but still provide enough explanation so that the analysis is meaningful and not just a list.

With SWOT analysis in particular, there's usually an implicit (or explicit) expectation that you’ll come to a view by the end, i.e. whether you’d advise the client to pursue the opportunity, or which of a few options you think is best. That’s why I’d always start with a short executive summary at the top of the document or section, so that your recommendation is clear from the outset. Just a few sentences that give your headline view, along with a snapshot of the rationale. After that, you can structure the SWOT itself using subheadings (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats), and under each one, use a few bullet points with 1–2 lines of explanation to flesh out your thinking. Here's just an example of a template:

Executive Summary
Given [brief context], I recommend that [Client] proceeds with [Opportunity], as the strengths and opportunities outweigh the potential weaknesses and threats. Furthermore, [Opportunity] outweighs the other options that the Client has considered.

Strengths

• Strong brand recognition in the target market – this will give the client a competitive edge.
• Solid existing infrastructure, allowing for low-cost rollout.

Weaknesses

• Limited internal experience in the relevant regulatory landscape.
• Resource stretch: the opportunity would require diverting senior staff from core projects.

Opportunities

• Growing demand in the target sector – early movers may benefit from first-mover advantage.
• Possible partnership with [X], which could de-risk the venture.

Threats

• Increased competition from [Y] entering the space.
• Political uncertainty in [region], which may impact market stability.

If there are multiple opportunities to consider, you would follow a similar structure for the other options. I’d suggest two to four points under each heading, unless you’ve been told to provide a more in-depth analysis. You can also add an overall recommendation at the end, though sometimes it works just as well to bring that into the executive summary at the top. In terms of analysis, this article might also be useful in thinking through the kinds of factors that typically come up in SWOT and PESTLE analysis.

Hope that helps!

 

[trainee4u]

Highest in both verbal and numerical

That's crazy. 9877 is essentially perfect.

Were there any diversity related questions on the application form? I don't remember.

 

[xere]

Feeling super deflated after a WBD PFO had scores of 7677, high intellect & mid numerical.

 

[Amehta1]

That's crazy. 9877 is essentially perfect.

Were there any diversity related questions on the application form? I don't remember.

I can ask but from what I remember discussing the application with them I don’t think so?

 

[trainee4u]

I can ask but from what I remember discussing the application with them I don’t think so?

they say yes but I don't honestly remember

The first stage of our process is a short application form. You’ll be asked to share details of your undergraduate degree and any further vocational education, your life history, and information as part of the Rare Contextualised Recruitment System, which allows us to understand the context in which your experiences have been gained and enables us to identify top candidates from the widest pool possible.

It's weird, if you design a recruitment process in this way you either:

1. end up with irrelevant luck-based distinctions between candidates and/or
2. end up with a large number of candidates with the same score and then you must choose between them based on some undisclosed criteria that are not likely to link to job ability.

 

[legallady123]

Pfo from WBD too and my amberjack score was pretty decent, with average numerical and excelled in verbal 😕 I have lots of paralegal experience and a first in my RG law degree (I know lots of people are in the same situation with a good degree classification and experience, so this doesn’t necessarily stand out) but just a bit surprised at not having progressed past second stage with any apps in my first London cycle 🥲 I genuinely had way better luck in applications as an undergrad with hardly any experience !

 

[Amehta1]

they say yes but I don't honestly remember

The first stage of our process is a short application form. You’ll be asked to share details of your undergraduate degree and any further vocational education, your life history, and information as part of the Rare Contextualised Recruitment System, which allows us to understand the context in which your experiences have been gained and enables us to identify top candidates from the widest pool possible.

It's weird, if you design a recruitment process in this way you either:

1. end up with irrelevant luck-based distinctions between candidates and/or
2. end up with a large number of candidates with the same score and then you must choose between them based on some undisclosed criteria that are not likely to link to job ability.

Definitely, some greater clarity and transparency about the selection process would be highly appreciated.

 

[Ram Sabaratnam]

SPB VAC SCHEME offer!!

Amazing! Great firm! I hope it goes so well!

 

[Ram Sabaratnam]

Which office? Me too 🩷

Another vac scheme offer on this forum! May your free coffee be strong and your redlines few!!!

 

[BillSikes]

my friend got a PFO from WBD London today after getting 9877 on the assessment. Especially because there were no application questions, with a score as high as that I can’t think of one reason for the rejection? What would they even have based it on?

Yes it’s absolutely ridiculous

 

[trainee4u]

Yes it’s absolutely ridiculous

honestly the firm did so much damage to its reputation with the Post Office case, I'm not sure how they think that recruitment processes like this are a step in the right direction. "ooh we have a reputational issue, what can we do, oh I know, let's make everything based on a short SJT, then pick people at random anyway".

 

[xanderlawyer]

The legal recruitment process is excruciatingly bad. I’ve also yet to secure an offer after 4 assessment centres with different firms the last 2 years.

There’s just too much bias involved in interviews that people are rejected because they weren’t ‘liked’. They shouldn’t allow partners or associates to conduct interviews anymore! It’s awful.

At the end of the day, partners have ownership in the firm and it is of material interest of them to engage in the recruiting process. Partners look for people they can see working alongside, and I've learned that their choice can be a lot more human-centred than grades / scores in an assesment. Being likeable / charismatic / enthusiastic will of course put you in much better stead. This is why it is important to find firms whose culture aligns with your character.

 

[Ram Sabaratnam]

Quick WG Assumption Q:

For humankind to survive, it must colonise other planets.
Assumption - There will be a time when the Earth can no longer sustain human life.

Am I right in saying that an assumption has been made here?

The only thing I can think of against this is that Earth may very well sustain human life, but not be sufficient. Then again, that would mean that it technically cannot sustain human life, and therefore, the assumption is made.

Also, if I were to invert this: There will be a time when the Earth can sustain human life, then the proposed statement becomes redundant, which should logically indicate that there is an assumption, no?

3.30 am yk, I hate these damn tests.

Hiya @broalabear


Just wanted to add to what @Amma Usman has already said. Hoping this makes sense as an explanation for what you should try to do during the assumption section of the WG. Good news is that you're right that this proposed assumption is assumed by the main claim.

An assumption is a statement that the writer/speaker takes for granted in order for another claim to make sense. It’s not stated directly, but it’s essential for the logic of the main claim to hold up. If the proposed assumption turned out to be false, then the main claim/argument would either collapse or at least become much weaker.

One useful way to test whether a statement is an assumption is to imagine what would happen if that proposed assumption were false. I call this the 'negation test'. Ask yourself: if this proposed assumption were false, would the main claim/argument still work? If the answer is no (e.g. if the main claim/argument falls apart), then the proposed assumption IS assumed. If the main statement/argument still works fine, then it’s probably not an assumption.

Let’s take the example you've provided here:

1. Main claim: "For humankind to survive, it must colonise other planets."
   
   
2. Proposed assumption: "There will be a time when the Earth can no longer sustain human life."

Now try negating the proposed assumption. Imagine that the Earth will always be able to sustain humankind. If that were true, then would we need to colonise other planets to survive (remember, this is what's being claimed in (1))? Doesn't look like it. Thus, the main claim is significantly weakened/no longer makes sense if we don't accept the proposed assumption.

This method works well in general: take the proposed assumption you're testing, imagine it's false, and see what happens to the main argument/claim. If the whole thing unravels, you've found an assumption. If the argument/claim still stands, then the proposed assumption is very likely not an assumed.

Let me know if you’d like to more examples or if this doesn't make sense.

 

[Bread]

The legal recruitment process is excruciatingly bad. I’ve also yet to secure an offer after 4 assessment centres with different firms the last 2 years.

There’s just too much bias involved in interviews that people are rejected because they weren’t ‘liked’. They shouldn’t allow partners or associates to conduct interviews anymore! It’s awful.

May be a controversial take, but fundamentally law firms are partnerships where people work very closely together, so imo it makes sense for lawyers to be involved in the recruitment process and pick whom they find likeable, because at the end of the day they will be working long hours together
Besides, if two people don’t click it’s usually mutual, so these personality-based rejections are probably just steering you towards an environment that is more suited to you! Best of luck for your remaining apps x

 

[marisachr]

Don't know how easy it is to find an answer to my question, but here it goes - are there any firms that often give their paralegals opportunities to convert to TC/recruit their trainees from mostly/some of their paralegal cohort? @Jessica Booker @Ram Sabaratnam @Andrei Radu

 

[Bbhu19]

Feeling super deflated after a WBD PFO had scores of 7677, high intellect & mid numerical.

8887 mid mid PFO for WBD

 

[Ali2020]

Has anyone heard back from Aspiring Solicitor's Sky internship?

Hey, I heard back yesterday to complete a MCQ test....not sure if this is automatic to everyone?

 

[Ali2020]

I got an email just now inviting me to MCQ'S.

me too! stressing how to complete this in the short timeframe!

 

[trainee4u]

me too! stressing how to complete this in the short timeframe!

4 minutes, twenty questions, 12 seconds each, I suggest making sure you have a good PC, internet connection, and a mouse (laptop trackpad/pointer slows you down).

 

[Ram Sabaratnam]

Don't know how easy it is to find an answer to my question, but here it goes - are there any firms that often give their paralegals opportunities to convert to TC/recruit their trainees from mostly/some of their paralegal cohort? @Jessica Booker @Ram Sabaratnam @Andrei Radu

Hiya @marisachr

I think @Jessica Booker would likely have a better understanding of this, but wanted to get to you with some information.

From what I’ve seen, there definitely are firms that recruit most or all of their trainees from their paralegal cohort. I know of several strong litigation boutiques (e.g. Stewarts and Leigh Day) where the typical path to a training contract is through a paralegal role at the firm. I’m a bit less sure about how this plays out at transactionally focused firms, but during my assessment centres and vacation schemes, I’ve met various paralegals who were also currently working at those firms. That said, I think it's difficult to say with any certainty whether a specific firm recruits many trainees from its paralegal pool, since there's very little data on this.

One thing I would say is that paralegalling (even if it doesn’t lead to a TC at your current firm) can still be a great way into the profession. I’ve met a lot of paralegals who’ve gone on to secure training contracts elsewhere, often at firms with a similar profile or practice area focus. The experience you gain in these roles can be so helpful when you do apply for a TC later on.