🚨 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="Andrei Radu" data-source="post: 212357" data-attributes="member: 36777">Hi [USER=33798]@InterestInPublicLaw[/USER] for your first question about the sector-based approach, the first point to make about researching TLT is that besides the sources you have listed, I would take a look at the broader legal press (in particular, The Lawyer, Legal Business, and The Global Legal Post) as it may contain useful comparisons between how well different firms are doing in a given sector. Secondly, I think there are two options you can go for to try to make your answer stand out. On the one hand, you could try to impress with the depth of your understanding of 1/2 key benefits of this approach and analyze it in a lot of detail. If you could also find a deal/case the firm advised on in which the relevant expertise benefit is illustrated, that could make your reasoning quite compelling. On the other hand, you could try to impress recruiters by showing the breadth of your understanding - ie, that you are aware of all the main advantages of a sector-based approach. This is the way I went about answering such questions when I was applying, as I was relying on a "need to make sure I tick all the boxes" strategy. I think both options can work, but to the extent that you will consider going for the second, I have made a list of the main benefits of a sector focus: Benefits for clients:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Ease of service: essentially, a sector-focused firm will deliver legal services in a way that is a lot easier for the client to use. Firstly, if a firm organizes teams more around sectors than practice areas, it looks and is a lot more similar to the client's business. Businesses perceive themselves as players in a certain industry and do not neatly separate their legal needs between the different workstreams of different practice areas. Thus, the legal service of sector-focused firms seems a lot more tailored to the client. Secondly, industry-focused firms tend to have partners with significantly broader expertise. Hence, the firm can provide a 'one-point-of-contact' system to clients, which is easier to navigate administratively.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Strategic advice: the idea is that if you spend years and years working on matters in a single industry, by the time you become a more senior practitioner you will have almost as much technical expertise in the sector as the client themselves. Having this kind of deep insight and knowledge of the industry will not only mean that you can give better advice to clients on particular mandates, but it will also mean you will be in a better position to form a client-lawyer relationship which goes beyond that. This way, you will have a good chance of getting to know all the insides of the client's business and becoming their go-to strategic advisor. Thus, the client gets the benefit of exceptional business and legal advisory services simultaneously.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Industry reputation: if the firm generally does a lot of high-end work in a particular sector, it will become very reputable with businesses in that sector. The fact that firm will simply be a very well-known name definitely helps in terms of shaping advantageous negotiations dynamics with opposing counsel. A great example of this is Kirkland in the PE sphere. Simply because of the firm's reputation in this area, it is able to obtain advantageous terms for clients by insisting they are "market terms". Because nobody does as many deals as they do in PE, it is sometimes difficult for the other side's counsel to counteract Kirkland's claims.</li> </ol>Benefits for employees:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Learning more about the intricacies of the sector as a benefit in itself: if you have a prior interest in a given sector of the economy, working for a firm that has a focus on that sector will enable you to get a lot more exposure to it, which can be a benefit in and of itself. Just as you might have a general interest in commercial law because you have a general interest in learning more about and working with businesses, you might also have a specific interest in sector-focused firms because you have a specific interest in learning more about the sector. This reasoning will be especially persuasive if you have some previous work or other relevant experience related to the sector. Personally, I have seen candidates write persuasive answers based on this type of question in regards to sectors ranging from tech and financial services to energy, pharma and transportation.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Becoming a true strategic business advisor: this is similar to the line of reasoning you mentioned but is focused on long-term career prospects. As mentioned before, repeated experience in a single industry means you will in time become very technically proficient in your understanding of it. This puts you in a great position to become a true strategic adviser, which is potentially a more interesting role than just dealing with their legal requests.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">More high-end mandates: if the firm can generally provide better service than its competitors because of its sector focus, this also means that the firm will be better placed to win the top of the market mandates from that industry. This might be naturally attractive to you, as these mandates tend to be the among the most complex and consequential.</li> </ol>As for your second question, about making the two general challenges you have mentioned specific to trainees, I would focus a lot on (i) how they impact specifically the workload of trainees, and (ii) how the trainees' position might make it more difficult to address them. For (i), I would firstly discuss how trainees have been traditionally responsible for most admin-heavy work such as due diligence and document review. These tasks are becoming increasingly easier to automate with the advent of generative AI, but clients still want to be sure the work is error-proof and want firms to be ultimately responsible for the work. As such, trainees will need to ensure that to the extent AI is used, it is error-free. However, this is a difficult task for trainees as they will lack experience in identifying the kinds of errors bound to occur with this type of work and the attention to detail skills they will need are themselves built by manually completing such admin-heavy tasks. Secondly, in relation to the pay wars, you can discuss how the industry is becoming increasingly "Americanized", in that to justify the high salaries, firms might become increasingly demanding of their trainees and push high responsibility work on them that they were not adequately prepared for. Now, for (ii), I would also analyze these issues from the perspective of a trainee as someone who is as inexperienced as it gets in the legal profession. This will inevitably mean that they will be less well-equipped to handle big changes and adapt to significant challenges - at this point in their career, they are mostly still just trying to figure out the basics.</blockquote>

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

Top Bottom

Search

Search

Reply to thread