Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ram Sabaratnam" data-source="post: 192373" data-attributes="member: 36738">Hiya [USER=4098]@futuretraineesolicitor[/USER]Yep, you could definitely discuss the experience of drafting a commercial agreement in your answer, though I suggest you think carefully about how you frame this experience. Focus on what it was about drafting the agreement that was interesting to you and that demonstrates you have the skills that would allow you to stand out at a firm like Kirkland. For instance, did you enjoy understanding client needs, the specific dynamics of responding to pressures in the energy sector, or perhaps any negotiation you might have seen or been involved in? Again, have a close look at how you're framing the experience when justifying your interest in transactional work.As for your second question, while it’s good to show a clear preference for transactional work, I don't think you need to do so by way of explicitly comparing this to advisory or litigation work. This is partly for the excellent point that [USER=32830]@SoonToBeTrainee[/USER] made above - a point which important to appreciate in the case of Kirkland, since the nature of their transactional work very often has significant implications from a regulatory and litigation standpoint. Instead, I'd encourage you to focus on what it is about advisory work that's interesting to you, focussing on 2-3 points here (some of which I mentioned in my previous post on this).Update: Whoops, hadn't seen what [USER=2672]@Jessica Booker[/USER] said but YES!!!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ram Sabaratnam, post: 192373, member: 36738"] Hiya [USER=4098]@futuretraineesolicitor[/USER] Yep, you could definitely discuss the experience of drafting a commercial agreement in your answer, though I suggest you think carefully about how you frame this experience. Focus on what it was about drafting the agreement that was interesting to you and that demonstrates you have the skills that would allow you to stand out at a firm like Kirkland. For instance, did you enjoy understanding client needs, the specific dynamics of responding to pressures in the energy sector, or perhaps any negotiation you might have seen or been involved in? Again, have a close look at how you're framing the experience when justifying your interest in transactional work. As for your second question, while it’s good to show a clear preference for transactional work, I don't think you need to do so by way of explicitly comparing this to advisory or litigation work. This is partly for the excellent point that [USER=32830]@SoonToBeTrainee[/USER] made above - a point which important to appreciate in the case of Kirkland, since the nature of their transactional work very often has significant implications from a regulatory and litigation standpoint. Instead, I'd encourage you to focus on what it is about advisory work that's interesting to you, focussing on 2-3 points here (some of which I mentioned in my previous post on this). Update: Whoops, hadn't seen what [USER=2672]@Jessica Booker[/USER] said but YES!!! [/QUOTE]

Verification

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

Search

Search

Reply to thread