Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="bronson" data-source="post: 24588" data-attributes="member: 1148">I had an AC there this year so can give some insight. It was definitely the most tiring AC I've done so be prepared for a long day which consists of 4 parts:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Group Exercise - will most likely be reviewing something and having to come to a decision. If you aren't the leader type then don't forcefully try and take this role. Make sure you get your point across, even if it is a large group, don't be afraid to speak up but do not cut across someone to do so. Be commercial about it (mine wasn't a legal problem) and think logically about the situation. If there is an obvious but outlandish suggestion which you have then say it, particularly if others are skirting around it - I suggested to completely cut out a huge chunk of something in our situation. Be supportive as well - if someone has a good point make sure you clearly state you agree with it, and actively listen by incorporating other people's suggestions into yours. But also don't be a kiss ass and agree with everything everyone says - even though in the feedback I was told I was quite direct they said it worked well because everyone was just agreeing the whole time. However, if you do counter someone's point do it in a constructive and amicable manner.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Competency interview - most likely with an associate. Very scripted competency questions. Quite a few as well so make sure you have a variety of experiences to draw upon. I think I also got asked why Baker McKenzie.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Case study interview - most likely with two partners/ a partner and senior associate. Will be a legal case study and problem with 30-45 mins to prepare and then an hour and a half interview. One thing I lacked on (and would recommend not to) was really reading in deep detail the definitions and different elements of clauses. Also, try and imagine the problem through a commercial lense and how the legal elements might play out in reality. Show an interest in the area as well - we went a bit off-piste because I starting asking questions about the statute we were using which the partner got really excited about. And goes without saying make sure you are logically mapping out your thought process through words. Don't answer their questions with one word answers, or if you do, do it in a structured way so that Answer = X and this is because Y + Z. Imagine the partners are braindead and don't have a logical bone in their body - spell it out for them. Once that's over it'll move into motivations for Bakers, your history etc. they are big on their transactional international identity and their history behind this so weave that in somehow - and when I say this don't just go "you have offices in 60 countries and do cross-border work". Know why they've ended up that way, how they've used it to their advantage, and why this means something to you. Also be able to justify your other applications i.e. don't say that you've applied to Baker McKenzie, Bristows and Fox Williams, but rather keep the theme of international and top-tier.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Document checking exercise - basic grammar, spell-check. Strike a balance between speed and accuracy, leaning ever so slightly towards accuracy. You won't finish so don't panic if you don't.</li> </ol>And be consistent and friendly throughout the whole process. Some people tend to trail off towards the end or at certain parts, which when I got my outcome I was told was one of the main things they look at, consistency.Hope this helps - good luck!</blockquote>

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

Top Bottom

Search

Search

Reply to thread