Haven’t clicked on the link yet as I’m not near my laptop atm. But I have clicked the tips for preparation link which took me straight to the firm’s website, specifically the page where they say what skills they look for candidates. I know previously the test was Amberjack, the classic mix of SJT, verbal and numerical questions with VI at the end. But now I’m not sure it’s that…30 minutes doesn’t seem like enough time to complete a whole Amberjack!
-
Join Premium →Get Everything You Need to Secure a Training ContractNow half the price. Join TCLA Premium for £30/month and get step-by-step application support, daily commercial awareness practice, and 700+ successful examples of past applications and interview experiences. Plus so much more.
TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2025-26
- Thread starter Ram Sabaratnam
- Start date
Haven’t clicked on the link yet as I’m not near my laptop atm. But I have clicked the tips for preparation link which took me straight to the firm’s website, specifically the page where they say what skills they look for candidates. I know previously the test was Amberjack, the classic mix of SJT, verbal and numerical questions with VI at the end. But now I’m not sure it’s that…30 minutes doesn’t seem like enough time to complete a whole Amberjack!
I really hope it is Amberjack! By far my favourite out of all the ones I've done for the mix of tasks
The grad brochure indicates the next stage is a critical thinking test so perhaps shortlist.me offers that as well.
That is really helpful, thank you. Were the questions motivational or competency-based?
Hi @Andrei Radu in terms of identifying USPs that do not apply to another firm, how would you even find this (even with deep research, events etc) as a lot of firms work in same practice areas etc? Is it not sufficient enough to just mention what the firm does and therefore that makes it tailored to the firm? I am quite confused and I feel the whole USP part is slowing me down
If it is any help, if you click on the Get Help button at the end of the invite email and click participant in the website it is all about VIs….
I know I saw that as well! Oh well, part of the job is to be able to think on your feet so will do it on Wednesday and see what comes up.
Hey!
Sure, happy to share how I approached the VI!
In general for video interviews, it's really important to make sure that you are fully answering the question and that any examples that you use actually fit with the question. I used to have a tendency to want to use my strongest example and try and fit it to the question, however, the graduate recruitment team can usually tell and it'll look better to use an example that fits best (even if it is a less 'substantive' experience)
Another main thing I did was practice - it can be very weird to talk to a computer screen, so it really helped me to have a go at answering the most common interview questions in the mirror (even if it felt a little silly!). I had a tendency to ramble in my video interviews, so knowing roughly how long it would take me to cover my main topics was really helpful.
Make sure you also utilise your prep time, as this is really useful to have a clear idea of what you are going to say before you start recording - Reed Smith actually recommend you use the prep time instead of jumping straight into the questions! I would avoid writing a script as this can sound robotic and could reflect badly on your overall performance, but I stuck a post-it note with all the key points I wanted to discuss and used that when practising (and in the recording).
There's a video in the TCLA Law Firm Directory that I watched before my VI that I found was super helpful - I'll link it here. I'd definitely give that a watch, as Rik gives some great advice on what they are looking for and how to approach each aspect of the assessment.
Overall, just answer truthfully and be yourself. I think there's a tendency to think you have to come across as super composed and scripted for a video interview, but this isn't necessarily how you would behave in an actual interview. Take a moment to relax before recording, and try and come across as approachable and friendly - show them your personality and what your strengths are!
I hope that assists
Hey!
I would try not to focus too much on the specific traits that were your highest and lowest scoring. Whilst 'personal responsibility' was listed as the area that you need to work on, this doesn't necessarily mean that you scored really low - it was just the lowest scoring trait compared to the others. This doesn't automatically mean a rejection, and I'd try to stay positive until you hear back!
For DLA, the question says to "select one article from DLA Piper Insights page", I went to the page and selected something that's a longer form guide. Does anyone if that is okay or does it need to be one of the short form articles?
Not sure if I'm overthinking it - would appreciate any input on this
Not sure if I'm overthinking it - would appreciate any input on this
I would like to know aswell, commented earlier but no response.
- Sep 9, 2024
- 1,032
- 1,808
Hi @Lawlife5 this is a great question about a quite complex issue, and I will firstly clarify that what I will comment here does come down to my opinion on the matter - it is not a purely factual statement of absolute truth. Based on my experience with the application process and conversations with recruiters, I think the ways firms assess a "why the firm" answer can be broadly separated into two categories I will elaborate on bellow.
1. The "If the candidate's reasoning equally applies to any other firms, it is insufficiently specific" view:
Essentially, when taken together, the candidate's why the firm reasons need to not apply to any other law firm to the same extent to which they apply to the firm in question. Importantly, however, it is not necessary for any individual reason to apply only to this firm and no other - this would be an impossible task in the case of many law firms; as you observed, many firms have similar practice areas and expertise. Rather, what is required is that, when taken in conjunction, the USPs you connect your motivations not apply to the same extent to any other firm.
Thus, the concept of "Unique Selling Points" can therefore be somewhat misleading, as USPs will not in many cases be truly "unique": instead, USPs will only pick out feature of a firm that distinguish it from the majority of other law firms (rather than every single one). Furthermore, in many cases a USP will not have a simple YES/NO applicability to a firm - e.g. for a motivation tied to a firm's strength and reputation in a practice area, there will be more of a spectrum in from "Vert strong" to "Very weak"; hence, the question of the extent to which a USP applies to a firm comes in. Under this conceptualisation, it may make more sense to see USPs as selection criteria for firms you are interested in; and to understand the task of presenting a compelling "Why the firm" answer as a task of presenting a cogent narrative as to what selection criteria you could have so that the relevant firm would score overall the highest.
Understood this way, if you take two or three of such USPs together, in most cases you will find they will not apply to the same extent to another firm. Take Latham for instance, and consider the following USPs: (i) a leading PE practice, and (ii) top tier expertise in both sponsor and borrower side finance work; (iii) a global elite law firm. The first USP would already exclude a lot of firms, retaining only a few US firms such as Kirkland and Simpson Thacher and some Magic Circle players such as Clifford Chance and Freshfields; the second USP would exclude US rivals, keeping only some of the MC firms; while the third would not apply to any UK firms, leaving us with only Latham.
2. The "If the candidate's reasoning picks up important features of our firm that distinguishes it from most rivals, it is sufficiently specific" view:
Other recruiters assess candidates through simpler lens, essentially only looking to see whether the candidate's reasoning is compelling to the effect that it seems plausible that the candidate would find a firm of this type attractive. Under this view, even when taken together the reasons provided need not pass the "not equally applicable to another firm to the same extent test". Rather, what recruiters will be looking for is whether the candidate has a genuine interest in the important features of the firm's work, culture, training etc. to the effect that they can honestly say they want to join the firm - even if they may not be able to conclude that the candidate does not want to work at any other firm more more. To use the Latham example once again, something along the lines of a justification based on a broader strong corporate and banking & finance expertise would probably suffice here (although it would equally apply to, say, Clifford Chance).
My advice:
In my opinion it is difficult (if not impossible) to know under which of these frameworks a firm will assess your answer - this is definitely something too nuanced to be advertised, and it is probably something too nuanced to even be agreed at a graduate recruitment-wide department level. Rather, it seems to me this tends to come down to the preferences of the individual recruiters who will be reviewing your application. As such, to err on the side of caution, (and if possible), I would advise you to write assuming recruiters will have the first view - as no one will complain that your why the firm justifications are too specific.
Similar threads
- Sticky
