Hi Guest, I just wanted to give you a heads up that we are hiring future trainees. This is for a range of roles, including remote and full time.

If you're interested, apply here ASAP!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Andrei Radu" data-source="post: 183169" data-attributes="member: 36777">Hi there - and thanks for the question! 1. I think your approach should depend on the specific work experience you are describing. In general, I think it is good advice to use the STAR structure, especially if the work experience includes a higher number of aspects you could discuss. Regarding the link to commercial law, I don't think linking the skills your experience demonstrates to the job of a trainee can disadvantage you. However, I'd be weary of repeating myself across the application or making tenuous connections. 2. The short answer is yes - I think a substantial amount of research significantly improves your chances of writing truly high-quality applications. The longer answer is that it depends. Firstly, it depends on your own pace of research - some people are able to find the relevant information and exhaust sources a lot faster than others. Secondly, it depends on how easy it is to find a law firm's unique selling points (USPs) - this is the main objective of your research. Some firms, like Slaughter and May, will advertise their selling points from an applicant's perspective directly on their website. For some other firms, you can find articles discussing their USPs from secondary sources like TCLA's Law Firms Profiles. For other firms, you will have to find these USPs by making inferences from your own research. That being said, I do think there is a point of diminishing returns in investing a lot of time in research. Your primary objective should be to find firm USPs that you can link to your motivations and experiences to enable you to write a great answer to 'Why the firm' questions. As such, once you have found that, you should not feel you need to continue researching for researching's sake. 3. Firstly, congratulations for sticking with the applications and for deciding to fully commit this cycle. Commitment and consistency in your efforts makes a huge difference and significantly increases your chances of success. I know it's easy to say and lot more difficult to actually practice, but do try not to feel disheartened by the rejections. Everyone keeps repeating how competitive the application process is, but few actually internalize what this means. MC/SC firms generally have an under 2% success rate, and some elite US firms have a success rate under 1%. Even the very best of candidates (Oxbridge/top Russell group unis, 1.1 degree outcome/prediction, previous legal work experience, and high quality written answers) get rejected in around 2/3 of their applications. Commercial law applications are in big part a numbers game - many people get rejected in 20-30 applications before finally getting their TCs. In my own journey, in my first cycle I was rejected at first stage in all my applications. The second time (which is when I fully committed to the process), I was rejected in my first few applications just like you, but finished the cycle with three TC offers from top US firms. Do not take rejections personally - I ended up being rejected at the first stage by some of the firms in whose applications I had put most effort in, and ended up being progressed with some of the applications I thought could have been further improved. Acknowledge that you can and will fail many times - but that matters not, as you only need to succeed once. Finally, try to use your frustration with your past rejections as a source of motivation for being more determined than ever to write as many great applications as possible. You are not alone, and you definitely can do it! 4. Here, I'd say your grades are not a big issue (besides a small number of firms that are really selective on this point, and are generally well known for this). The first year grades are the ones recruiters will be least focused on. Also, I've seen many people with mid 2.1s get into MC/top US firms. Similarly, although some firms are more focused on Oxbridge and top Russell group unis, I've seen enough candidates from less prestigious universities get TCs at such firms that I think it's definitely worth a shot. However, this is a factor that you should keep in mind when constructing your application strategy and I definitely think you should apply to diverse range of firms to maximize success chances. Even if your ultimate objective might be to work for a particular type of firm, it is a lot easier to get there by pursuing a lateral move post qualification rather than applying again and again for a TC. Hope this was helpful and best of luck with your applications this cycle!</blockquote>

Verification: Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?

Top Bottom

Search

Search

Reply to thread