🚨 Reed Smith has just announced its Direct Training Contract route!
The deadline is 20th June.

👉 Read Becca's announcement post here
📝 Apply directly here

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Abstruser" data-source="post: 13364" data-attributes="member: 260">So I just want to caveat this by saying you should try to get firsthand experience interacting with US firms (particularly the ones you are interested in) instead of basing your decisions on hearsay or other people's experiences.The US firms I was interested in and interacted with had small trainee intakes and little by way of formal supervision or training. So while that means you will be given greater responsibility from the get-go, I was doubtful as to whether I was capable of learning that much independently and also thought I would like to benefit from formal training eg: in-house advocacy, business skills, etc. MC firms had larger trainee intakes so progression in terms of responsibility might be slower or more 'boring', but I thought I would prefer to have a solid grounding and more supervision especially at the beginning of my career. Of course not all US firms fall into this stereotype - there are a few I can think of that have large intakes and more structured training, especially the ones that have been offering TCs in London for a longer time.I also didn't mean that US firms expect their trainees to know which areas they can qualify into - sorry if that confused you. I meant that most (again, not all) US firms are very well-known for one or two practice areas, and the rest of their practice areas are sort of 'support' for the star practice areas of the firm if that makes sense. My impression from other candidates and trainees I met at events was that when people are attracted to a US firm, it usually is because they know which areas (eg, private equity) they are interested in qualifying into. So they know they are joining a firm with a top-notch, say, private equity practice, and aren't really bothered about the strength of the litigation or corporate seats. In my opinion (and others may not share this opinion), MC firms tend to have more balanced practice areas, in that most of their practice areas will be top-notch and you know that you will be getting great exposure and experience in each seat. I don't know which area I want to qualify into, so for me getting broad, quality experience across the board was a paramount consideration.I hope that makes more sense. Obviously not saying that there's anything bad about US firms - just that they didn't suit my current priorities and ambitions, but they might very well suit someone else's!</blockquote>

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

Top Bottom

Search

Search

Reply to thread