Do firms really consider mitigating circumstances?

[annapierre]

I was just wondering if anyone had any insight (re: the title). I have poor first year grades (non-law degree, Russel Group) because I had to resit 2 modules and my grades were capped at 40 (would've otherwise been a 2:1), I have very strong documented mitigated circumstances that are the reason for this though. I know that a lot of firms do have space for mitigating circumstances on their applications but heard from others that they aren't genuinely considered and that a 2:2 in first year would be an automatic rejection when the application was screened. This is also compiled with kind of mid A-level results (A*/A/B). I understand I'm not a candidate for US/MC/SC firms but was still hoping for strong city firms, does anyone have any advice/insight regarding this? Thanks

 

[annapierre]

I had one bad grade in first year (law russell group) that brought my overall average to a 2:2. I then got a mid-high 2:1 in second year. I explained mitigating circumstances in app form and have had a vac scheme at a US firm, and have progressed beyond the app stage at other international and national firms. There are some firms that are very very iffy about grades but that is only a few.

Nice thank you! Also well done on the VS I wish firms would just be transparent about being strict about grades so I wouldn't waste my time loll

 

[Abbie Whitlock]

I was just wondering if anyone had any insight (re: the title). I have poor first year grades (non-law degree, Russel Group) because I had to resit 2 modules and my grades were capped at 40 (would've otherwise been a 2:1), I have very strong documented mitigated circumstances that are the reason for this though. I know that a lot of firms do have space for mitigating circumstances on their applications but heard from others that they aren't genuinely considered and that a 2:2 in first year would be an automatic rejection when the application was screened. This is also compiled with kind of mid A-level results (A*/A/B). I understand I'm not a candidate for US/MC/SC firms but was still hoping for strong city firms, does anyone have any advice/insight regarding this? Thanks

Hey!

I definitely don't think a 2:2 in first-year is an automatic rejection across the board, especially where you have strong and well-evidenced mitigating circumstances. The majority of firms do genuinely take these into account, and first year grades typically carry less weight than later years anyway (though I'm sure there are some exceptions).

What matters most is your overall trajectory - if you are achieving consistent 2:1s (or higher) now, that can offset against any concerns they might have had in relation to your earlier performance. I wouldn't say your A-Level's are mid at all, and I don't think they will hold you back significantly either.

Realistically, some of the most competitive US/MC/SC firms may be stricter at the earlier screening stages, but many strong City firms will take a more holistic view of your application. I'd just make sure that you explain your mitigating circumstances clearly, so it is evident that those grades were an exception rather than a reflection of your overall academic ability

 

[annapierre]

Hey!

I definitely don't think a 2:2 in first-year is an automatic rejection across the board, especially where you have strong and well-evidenced mitigating circumstances. The majority of firms do genuinely take these into account, and first year grades typically carry less weight than later years anyway (though I'm sure there are some exceptions).

What matters most is your overall trajectory - if you are achieving consistent 2:1s (or higher) now, that can offset against any concerns they might have had in relation to your earlier performance. I wouldn't say your A-Level's are mid at all, and I don't think they will hold you back significantly either.

Realistically, some of the most competitive US/MC/SC firms may be stricter at the earlier screening stages, but many strong City firms will take a more holistic view of your application. I'd just make sure that you explain your mitigating circumstances clearly, so it is evident that those grades were an exception rather than a reflection of your overall academic ability

Thanks for your reply Do you think there's any way of discerning which firms are maybe more strict and which ones less so? Or is it just generally the more competitive ones?

 

[Abbie Whitlock]

Thanks for your reply Do you think there's any way of discerning which firms are maybe more strict and which ones less so? Or is it just generally the more competitive ones?

No problem!

I'd say there isn't really a reliable way to draw a hard line between those who are strict and those who are less so, as most firms won't openly disclose these types of things.

That said, as a general rule, I'd say that the more competitive firms (particularly those that place a strong emphasis on academics) are probably more likely to be stricter when it comes to grades, simply because of the volume of applications they get. However, I don't think that applies definitively across the board, and I'm sure that plenty of those firms do seriously consider your grades in the context of your entire application.

Beyond that, I'd try to pick up signals from firms that might offer some insight into how they approach these things. For example, firms that emphasise contextual recruitment or a holistic review, or having conversations with the graduate recruitment team (i.e. dropping them a quick email) might offer some insight too.

Importantly, I really wouldn't be discouraged from applying to more competitive firms either - you really don't know how your application will be received or the criteria that they follow when making these decisions. I went to a (pretty average!) non-RG university and I still managed to secure vacation schemes last cycle at a wide range of City firms, including a SC firm. Most firms do take a holistic view, especially where the mitigating circumstances are clearly set out.

I'd say it can be a helpful guideline if you want to applying strategically, but I wouldn't view it as something entirely definitive!

 

[annapierre]

No problem!

I'd say there isn't really a reliable way to draw a hard line between those who are strict and those who are less so, as most firms won't openly disclose these types of things.

That said, as a general rule, I'd say that the more competitive firms (particularly those that place a strong emphasis on academics) are probably more likely to be stricter when it comes to grades, simply because of the volume of applications they get. However, I don't think that applies definitively across the board, and I'm sure that plenty of those firms do seriously consider your grades in the context of your entire application.

Beyond that, I'd try to pick up signals from firms that might offer some insight into how they approach these things. For example, firms that emphasise contextual recruitment or a holistic review, or having conversations with the graduate recruitment team (i.e. dropping them a quick email) might offer some insight too.

Importantly, I really wouldn't be discouraged from applying to more competitive firms either - you really don't know how your application will be received or the criteria that they follow when making these decisions. I went to a (pretty average!) non-RG university and I still managed to secure vacation schemes last cycle at a wide range of City firms, including a SC firm. Most firms do take a holistic view, especially where the mitigating circumstances are clearly set out.

I'd say it can be a helpful guideline if you want to applying strategically, but I wouldn't view it as something entirely definitive!

Thank you! I needed this reassurance

 

[mg42guy32]

I was just wondering if anyone had any insight (re: the title). I have poor first year grades (non-law degree, Russel Group) because I had to resit 2 modules and my grades were capped at 40 (would've otherwise been a 2:1), I have very strong documented mitigated circumstances that are the reason for this though. I know that a lot of firms do have space for mitigating circumstances on their applications but heard from others that they aren't genuinely considered and that a 2:2 in first year would be an automatic rejection when the application was screened. This is also compiled with kind of mid A-level results (A*/A/B). I understand I'm not a candidate for US/MC/SC firms but was still hoping for strong city firms, does anyone have any advice/insight regarding this? Thanks

Hey! Firstly, you are still a potential US/MC candidate! I do think it would be better for you to focus on getting the best grades in your second year to really help but a 2:2 in first year is NOT the end of the world. I did STEM at an RG and got a 2:2 in first year with 2 40s and 2/3 50s (non MC). I ended up getting 63% in the second year and 71% in the final and have had ACs with Latham, MoFo, DLA, and Simmons, even in spite of that, so do not worry!

There are a couple of firms that are very strict module wise like Links and HSF, but most US firms just look for a solid 2:1 and a good promise

I hope that helps!