- Feb 17, 2018
- 4,695
- 8,577
Herbert Smith Freehills Assessment Centre 2020 - Anonymous
There were 7 of us at the assessment centre in total. We were taken to a holding room where the graduate recruiter explained what to expect on the day at around 9:30am.
A partner also came to speak to us. She provided an overview of the firm and answered any questions. Whilst I wasn’t interviewed by her, she mentioned she would be interviewing some of the candidates so I would recommend remembering which department the partner works in and that you don’t repeat questions that were already asked in the morning. The overview provided by the partner is helpful in just consolidating the research you’ve already done on the firm and puts you at ease.
We were spilt into two groups. I later realised this was in groups of law and non-law students.
My group had the case study first. The first two candidates from my group went in and two of us waited whilst they were being interviewed because we were to be interviewed by the same people.
Competency interview:
This was conducted by a senior associate. He introduced himself and which department he works. He also explained that this was just to find out more about me and didn’t have a strict approach which put me at ease.
The interview lasted around 30-40 minutes and it felt as though he didn’t ask me many competency questions because he asked a lot of follow-up questions. He would interject as I was answering a question to probe an answer further so prepare to be questioned/challenged on anything you say.
Questions:
· Why law?
· Why HSF?
· When have you managed a conflict in a team?
· When have you worked in a team to achieve a goal?
· What is something you will struggle with if you are a trainee at HSF in the future?
· Lots of questions on my chosen topic question – I had discussed the GDPR he asked me what I would do if a client came to me with a data breach? What are the exact steps I would take? And how would I defend my client before the ICO?
Case study
You are taken to another room with your group where you all stay in the same room and separately prepare for the presentation. You are given a booklet with different documents within it and a notepad. There was no calculator or any other tools. There is also a big clock in the room so keep an eye on the time. The graduate recruiter will also come into the room to let you know when there are five minutes left.
My case study focused on advising a client who owned land which was previously used as an airport. He had purchased the property in 2016 and was looking to build flats, a sports facility and retail stores on the property. However, [redacted]. Your client had been to see a local solicitor who had advised nothing could be done and now he had come to you to see further advice.
Questions to answer:
1) Do the management team have any grounds to apply for [redacted]? If not, why?
2) Did the management team have any way of acquiring the property according to the statute?
These were the two questions to be covered in the presentation to the partner (who would be acting as the client). There are additional 4 questions to consider which you will be questioned on. I would say there is sufficient time to get through all the documents and prepare for all the questions. Because you know are going to be questioned on the additional questions so you are best to go in prepared.
Make sure you structure your notes in an easy way for you to follow and that you address the client’s concerns. I did not get too bogged down in providing the client the exact subsection etc of the statute but rather focused on providing practical advice.
I also mentioned commercially relevant points such as the success/challenges of low cost airlines ([redacted]); the UK housing crisis and how the client wanted to build flats which would also be in the national interest; reputational damage arising from the case because it was being reported in the media. The partner appeared to like this.
The partner will seek to question you on any points you have missed and also say have you considered XYZ after you have finished presenting.
Situational judgement interview:
This is difficult to prepare for because it is up to the partner to just pick any case they have worked on. I would recommend to carefully listen to the partner when they tell you which department they work in and what work they do because they may contain the solution to resolve the problem.
The partner initially started off by just testing my general commercial knowledge such as who is a company run by? Whose benefit is a company run for? What is an executive and non-executive director? Can you give me examples? What do shareholders want? What kind of shareholders are these? (institutional and retail investors).
I would recommend taking notes (just ask to use a notepad if the partner does not offer you paper). The partner explained the case which involved a FTSE 250 company which was seeking to oust its CEO because there had been reports of bullying and senior staff were looking to leave. I mentioned that this case seemed familiar and the partner looked at me knowingly; he later confirmed that he was indeed talking about Ted Baker and its CEO.
He asked me questions about whether the CEO should be removed and how should he be removed. Remembering the partner mentioned doing investigations, I said an investigation could be undertaken to explore the claims made. I suggested that HSF would be great for this! And he also questioned me on who else could conduct such an investigation? Answers were the human resources team and internal general counsel.
He also asked me to draft two contractual terms on the spot that could be included to retain and incentivise senior staff into staying at the company – increase of bonus subject to increase in performance; to stay at the company for X amount of years.
He then passed me an excerpt from the Companies Act containing directors’ duties and asked me to identify the top two duties which would be important for the board to consider when tackling this problem. It took me a few tries to get the final answer but I always provided reasoning for every answer I gave to show the partner how all duties were important.
He questioned me on whether I agree with positive discrimination. He then posed a scenario where the board had to choose between a female and male candidate for the CEO role who were both of equal merit. I think regardless of how I would answered, it was more about my justification of my opinion.
This interview felt more like a conversation as it felt like the partner was guiding me to the right answer and was encouraging when I answered correctly and would say he would have taken the same action.
Tips and advice:
· Revise contract law thoroughly and contract law – director roles especially.
· Understanding of how the markets work, concerns facing investors (what do they want? – increase in share price and dividend), how we are all impacted by public companies (our pensions invest in them).
· Have a good structure for the case study so you don’t feel thrown off by the questions.
· Remember everything in the case study is there for a reason so even if it is not obvious, see if you can relate a particular fact to the scenario or solution you are offering.
· Be prepared to be questioned on anything you say in your competency questions. If you feel you did not get to finish an answer, ask if you can add to a question before moving on. For example, I did not get to add my third point for why HSF because the partner spent a long time probing my second point. I asked if I could add my third point before moving on and he was accommodating to this.
· Take notes wherever you can!
· Repeat a question back to the interviewer if you do not understand something.
· Do not be put off from the interviewer typing on their laptop as you are speaking and focus on what you are saying.
There were 7 of us at the assessment centre in total. We were taken to a holding room where the graduate recruiter explained what to expect on the day at around 9:30am.
A partner also came to speak to us. She provided an overview of the firm and answered any questions. Whilst I wasn’t interviewed by her, she mentioned she would be interviewing some of the candidates so I would recommend remembering which department the partner works in and that you don’t repeat questions that were already asked in the morning. The overview provided by the partner is helpful in just consolidating the research you’ve already done on the firm and puts you at ease.
We were spilt into two groups. I later realised this was in groups of law and non-law students.
My group had the case study first. The first two candidates from my group went in and two of us waited whilst they were being interviewed because we were to be interviewed by the same people.
Competency interview:
This was conducted by a senior associate. He introduced himself and which department he works. He also explained that this was just to find out more about me and didn’t have a strict approach which put me at ease.
The interview lasted around 30-40 minutes and it felt as though he didn’t ask me many competency questions because he asked a lot of follow-up questions. He would interject as I was answering a question to probe an answer further so prepare to be questioned/challenged on anything you say.
Questions:
· Why law?
· Why HSF?
· When have you managed a conflict in a team?
· When have you worked in a team to achieve a goal?
· What is something you will struggle with if you are a trainee at HSF in the future?
· Lots of questions on my chosen topic question – I had discussed the GDPR he asked me what I would do if a client came to me with a data breach? What are the exact steps I would take? And how would I defend my client before the ICO?
Case study
You are taken to another room with your group where you all stay in the same room and separately prepare for the presentation. You are given a booklet with different documents within it and a notepad. There was no calculator or any other tools. There is also a big clock in the room so keep an eye on the time. The graduate recruiter will also come into the room to let you know when there are five minutes left.
My case study focused on advising a client who owned land which was previously used as an airport. He had purchased the property in 2016 and was looking to build flats, a sports facility and retail stores on the property. However, [redacted]. Your client had been to see a local solicitor who had advised nothing could be done and now he had come to you to see further advice.
Questions to answer:
1) Do the management team have any grounds to apply for [redacted]? If not, why?
2) Did the management team have any way of acquiring the property according to the statute?
These were the two questions to be covered in the presentation to the partner (who would be acting as the client). There are additional 4 questions to consider which you will be questioned on. I would say there is sufficient time to get through all the documents and prepare for all the questions. Because you know are going to be questioned on the additional questions so you are best to go in prepared.
Make sure you structure your notes in an easy way for you to follow and that you address the client’s concerns. I did not get too bogged down in providing the client the exact subsection etc of the statute but rather focused on providing practical advice.
I also mentioned commercially relevant points such as the success/challenges of low cost airlines ([redacted]); the UK housing crisis and how the client wanted to build flats which would also be in the national interest; reputational damage arising from the case because it was being reported in the media. The partner appeared to like this.
The partner will seek to question you on any points you have missed and also say have you considered XYZ after you have finished presenting.
Situational judgement interview:
This is difficult to prepare for because it is up to the partner to just pick any case they have worked on. I would recommend to carefully listen to the partner when they tell you which department they work in and what work they do because they may contain the solution to resolve the problem.
The partner initially started off by just testing my general commercial knowledge such as who is a company run by? Whose benefit is a company run for? What is an executive and non-executive director? Can you give me examples? What do shareholders want? What kind of shareholders are these? (institutional and retail investors).
I would recommend taking notes (just ask to use a notepad if the partner does not offer you paper). The partner explained the case which involved a FTSE 250 company which was seeking to oust its CEO because there had been reports of bullying and senior staff were looking to leave. I mentioned that this case seemed familiar and the partner looked at me knowingly; he later confirmed that he was indeed talking about Ted Baker and its CEO.
He asked me questions about whether the CEO should be removed and how should he be removed. Remembering the partner mentioned doing investigations, I said an investigation could be undertaken to explore the claims made. I suggested that HSF would be great for this! And he also questioned me on who else could conduct such an investigation? Answers were the human resources team and internal general counsel.
He also asked me to draft two contractual terms on the spot that could be included to retain and incentivise senior staff into staying at the company – increase of bonus subject to increase in performance; to stay at the company for X amount of years.
He then passed me an excerpt from the Companies Act containing directors’ duties and asked me to identify the top two duties which would be important for the board to consider when tackling this problem. It took me a few tries to get the final answer but I always provided reasoning for every answer I gave to show the partner how all duties were important.
He questioned me on whether I agree with positive discrimination. He then posed a scenario where the board had to choose between a female and male candidate for the CEO role who were both of equal merit. I think regardless of how I would answered, it was more about my justification of my opinion.
This interview felt more like a conversation as it felt like the partner was guiding me to the right answer and was encouraging when I answered correctly and would say he would have taken the same action.
Tips and advice:
· Revise contract law thoroughly and contract law – director roles especially.
· Understanding of how the markets work, concerns facing investors (what do they want? – increase in share price and dividend), how we are all impacted by public companies (our pensions invest in them).
· Have a good structure for the case study so you don’t feel thrown off by the questions.
· Remember everything in the case study is there for a reason so even if it is not obvious, see if you can relate a particular fact to the scenario or solution you are offering.
· Be prepared to be questioned on anything you say in your competency questions. If you feel you did not get to finish an answer, ask if you can add to a question before moving on. For example, I did not get to add my third point for why HSF because the partner spent a long time probing my second point. I asked if I could add my third point before moving on and he was accommodating to this.
· Take notes wherever you can!
· Repeat a question back to the interviewer if you do not understand something.
· Do not be put off from the interviewer typing on their laptop as you are speaking and focus on what you are saying.
