🚨 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="Hazal" data-source="post: 2869" data-attributes="member: 694">First post as part of The Corporate Law Academy and I thought I'd jump in on this discussion, seeing as I'm particularly interested in sector-based firms.A bit of background on me: I've applied to both Osborne Clarke and Reed Smith, firms with a sector-based focus and have been relatively successful in passing their initial stages. Another firm I'm interested in for their sector-focus approach is Clyde & Co.For Osborne Clarke, one of the application questions was what benefits I thought a sector-based approach had for the firm. After extensive research, I highlighted benefits such as:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Law firms cannot please all potential clients - sector-based firms recognise that and can therefore target specific clients in their specific sectors.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Reputation for work in those sectors is enhanced for the firm - possibly allowing for smoother and easier business development - particularly useful in a saturated legal market.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Tying in to this, the reputation would likely be based on the firm's astute business knowledge for their particular sectors, not just legal knowledge. As a client in the tech industry, you are more likely to target a firm focusing on technology with extensive experience in the field, over a broader, full-service firm. You might feel you are in safer, more personal, hands.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Possible better potential for profit: Osborne Clarke's revenue jumped by 7% from 2016 to 2017. Certain experts have identified their sector-based strategy as the reason for this.</li> </ul>Some cons I've thought up on the spot might include:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Narrowing your business development potential with some clients who are diversified and therefore need legal assistance with multiple sectors. You could lose out on being their only legal provider. Conversely, the firm might be able to accommodate all their legal needs but the sector-based approach might prevent clients from considering this. Extensive marketing about what you can provide beyond your sectors, or within them, would be needed.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Sector-based approaches don't work for everybody. Would be better for smaller law firms (not really small but those much smaller than the biggest firms globally) who have already developed experience in the sectors they wish to focus on. Bigger firms such as Baker McKenzie and Linklaters pride themselves on being good at a lot of things and having a lot of lawyers and therefore, the capability to take on more clients than the average firm. While they could become sector-focused (never say never), their current structures suggest that they value different things to sector-based firms.</li> </ul></blockquote>

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

Top Bottom

Search

Search

Reply to thread