TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[MiddleEast]

Would it be possible to renegotiate your TC salary if you become qualified in another jurisdiction before starting your TC?

 

[jojo23]

I split mine in half 😭 I'm applying to 11 with 5 for spring and 6 for summer. none for winter because I'm an international student and the dates never align

That's a pretty fair split to be fair. I think for me the problem is that there are certain firms where I can only apply for winter schemes (due to being a graduate), others i can be more flexible and luckily some allow you to apply for all 3 in a preference order, but the issue is that it's hard to decide. For example (from memory) Freshfields i can only apply for winter, hsf kramer i could do any but I wouldn't know which to pick

 

[trainee4u]

Would it be possible to renegotiate your TC salary if you become qualified in another jurisdiction before starting your TC?

You're either a trainee or you're not, they wouldn't pay some trainees more than others. If you want to enter as a NQ then you'd need to find another role & pass SQE.

 

[billyonthespeeddial]

That's a pretty fair split to be fair. I think for me the problem is that there are certain firms where I can only apply for winter schemes (due to being a graduate), others i can be more flexible and luckily some allow you to apply for all 3 in a preference order, but the issue is that it's hard to decide. For example (from memory) Freshfields i can only apply for winter, hsf kramer i could do any but I wouldn't know which to pick

Don't overthink which to pick, especially for firms like HSF and Freshfields. They will have TC spaces for everyone, you'll be judged by the same standards at every scheme

 

[EMB]

Has anyone heard back from DAC Beachcroft?

 

[kunbia]

Has anyone heard back from DAC Beachcroft?

I'm pretty sure they stated that they'd get back to candidates in early August? So still a bit to go until then.

 

[LawEnthus]

Getting a bit nervous, I’m waiting to hear back from somewhere about the outcome of vacation scheme – whether I’m offered a training contract or not. They told us we would hear about a month and a half after the scheme at the latest. I haven’t heard anything yet, and it’s been a month.

For context, after the assessment centre they said they would let us know in about a month and they called me within two weeks. Should I be worried or does the TC decision making process just sometimes take a lot longer than AC to VS? I know they’ve only got a small recruitment team and run schemes in several cities and they gave everyone the same deadline for hearing back. Povs and experiences please?

 

[Chris Brown]

Following my previous post, where I discussed my experience last application cycle and where I applied, this post is about application strategy and interview preparation. I hope it helps those of you looking to apply to VS/DTC this cycle. I’d like to apologise in advance if this post ends up being incredibly long to read. I will begin with quoting my VS/DTC forum post for context:
​

I’m happy to share I have accepted a TC offer from my dream US firm! This decision was the most difficult one I have had to make in my life so far, but I am excited for what’s ahead in this TC and commercial law journey. 😅

Over the past 6-7 months, a lot of people have asked me about my experience going through this application cycle. I figured I would make a few posts addressing this, with the first being a breakdown of my entire cycle (see below):

Vacation Scheme (‘VS’) offers:

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld
Covington & Burling
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison
Stephenson Harwood
Willkie Farr & Gallagher

Direct Training Contract (‘DTC’) AC offers:

Baker McKenzie
Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe

Winter VS PFOs:

A&O Shearman: PFO post SJT/VI
Ashurst: PFO post OT
Dechert: PFO post app
Jones Day: PFO post app
Linklaters: PFO post WG
Norton Rose Fulbright: PFO post OT
Simmons & Simmons: PFO post SJT/VI

Spring & Summer VS PFOs:

Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner: PFO post VI
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer: PFO post OT
Hogan Lovells: PFO post WG
Macfarlanes: PFO post OT
Paul Hastings: PFO post VI
Ropes & Gray: PFO post app
Travers Smith: PFO post app
White & Case: PFO post VI

Direct TC PFOs:

Slaughter and May: PFO post app
Sullivan & Cromwell: PFO post app

To anybody who will be applying for VS or DTC in the upcoming cycle, I hope this offers some reassurance that rejection is 100% redirection. I received 17 PFOs this cycle, but remembered that it would only ever takes 1 yes. ☝️

Since so many of you have PM’d me asking for application strategy and interview advice, I will make a separate post for that. Best of luck to everyone who will be applying in the upcoming application cycle for VS/DTC. 😅​

1: how to select which firms to apply to:

The first thing I focused on was figuring out the things I wanted from a firm. There are so many different variables that must be considered as each and every firm is unique. However, in the context of city law firms, there are also several overlapping characteristics, which can help to determine the type of firm to apply to. For me, I looked at some of the following: 😅

a) academic requirements e.g., strong or high 2:1, AAA-ABB at A-level, strong GCSEs.
b) international nature of the firm - where does the firm have offices (e.g., Europe/Asia/USA)?
c) nature of work - multi-jurisdictional, cross-border transactions and disputes?
d) what clients does the firm have and do they instruct the firm regularly on mandates?
e) practice area strengths - corporate/disputes split focus, full-service vs specialist firm?
f) training contract structure (4 seats, 6 seats, non-rotational, compulsory seats, etc).
g) trainee intake size (larger intake of 50-100 or smaller intake of less than 25).
h) level of responsibility for trainees - hands on learning, leaner teams, larger teams etc.
i) trainee retention rates and firm culture - are trainees kept on as NQs and if so what %?
j) track to partnership - does the firm primarily hire laterally or promote internally?

Based on the above, I figured I was attracted to US/MC/SC firms more than national or regional law firms. However, with hindsight I would have applied to more US firms. There were so many firms I didn’t know existed e.g., Cleary Gottlieb, Debevoise & Plimpton, Gibson Dunn and Weil, Gotshal & Manges, up until I joined this forum, so ensure you do your research. 😂

As this process is hyper competitive, it’s super important to know which firms are best suited to your particular interests and skills. There is virtually no point in applying to firms like Paul, Weiss or Fried Frank if private equity isn’t your primary interest. Similarly, if you know a small trainee intake isn’t the best, applying to firms like Davis Polk or Orrick won’t be beneficial.

One thing I would stress the importance of is to not only aim for elite US/MC/SC firms. Some of these top city firms receive 3,000 applications each year for only 50-100 TCs. It’s better to try diversify applications and target other types of firms e.g., large city firms (SH, AG, CRS, HFW, TW, etc.). There is always the option to laterally move as an NQ to an elite firm. 🙂

I would also stress the importance of academic expectations. If a firm states it looks for a high 2:1 (68%) and AAA at A-level, it wouldn’t be a wise decision for someone to apply if they had a 2:2 and CCC. Applying for firms w/o minimum grade requirements is another strategic way of increasing chance of success. This is because they assess applications holistically. 😅

2: Applying criteria to firms (example):

Once you reach the point where you shortlist a specific number of firms that you want to apply to for WVS, SVS or DTC, the next thing to do is to apply this criteria to firms. There are some firms that will be more aligned to someone’s experiences, skills, interests, goals, academics, competencies, etc. Focus on these firms and not ones with less compatibility. 🙂

I will use Willkie Farr & Gallagher as an example to explain the above. I knew I was interested in M&A/PE, litigation/arbitration, competition and restructuring. Willkie had strengths in all of these areas. Further, Willkie is an international NY HQ US firm working on cross-border, multi-jurisdictional deals and disputes. The firm has a small trainee intake of 6-7 per year.

This means trainees at Willkie are given earlier and greater responsibility, learning on-the-job, working in leaner teams. Based on Legal Cheek data, Willkie retains around 80% of its trainees, suggesting most NQs qualify into the firm. The TC is split into 4 6 month seats with mandatory seats in PE M&A/Insurance M&A and litigation, investigations and enforcement.

Based on the criteria I had, Willkie ticked most of the boxes. This made it easier for me when it came to narrowing down my choices. In effect, I knew Willkie was a perfect firm for me, based on the things I was looking for in a firm. I used this process for every firm and narrowed down to around 20 firms. As the cycle progressed, I’d applied to 25 firms in total.

3: Implementing an application strategy:

This is probably the hardest part of applying to firms. Forming an application strategy that will guide you through making VS/DTC applications is quite challenging, especially if it’s someone’s first cycle. Some questions that might come up are ‘why is an application strategy important?’, ‘is this more a numbers game or should I focus on producing fewer, high quality applications?’

I didn’t prepare a proper application strategy at the beginning of the cycle. As a result, 7/7 of all WVS applications I submitted resulted in a PFO (sad times for me). It was at this point I realised that I need to change my approach. I decided I wanted to focus on open day applications over VS/DTC applications. I used what I learned and implemented them into my applications. 😀

If you are interested in particular firms, I would recommend first applying to open days. They are not only great ways to learn more about a firm, but they also count as legal experience to include on applications and help you articulate your interest in that firm. I would also suggest completing forage courses for each firm where possible and attend virtual events. 🙂

Combining all these together will mean you can produce a super tailored, well-researched DTC and VS application. Speaking to future trainees either on LinkedIn or by arranging calls is also a great way of achieving this. Of course it’s not always possible to do things this way, but most of the time, it works. My application strategy is based on a post by @Andrei Radu (see below):
​

Introduction​

This post is meant to serve you as a definitive guide to crafting your optimal application strategy. As it is quite lengthy, I have divided it into five subsections for you to navigate according to your interests:

1. Why do you need an application strategy?
2. How many law firms should you apply to?
3. How should you choose which firms you apply to?
4. When should you apply?
5. What opportunities should you apply for?

1) Why do you need an application strategy?​

As we are reaching the middle of September and the 2025 application cycle is properly kicking off, it is the perfect moment for you to start considering how to construct your application strategy. Clarifying your goals and devising an appropriate plan is an underrated but essential element of maximizing your chances of success in a very competitive process. However, this statement might strike some of you as odd – what is there to strategize so much about? Shouldn’t you simply start writing and submitting applications?

To illustrate the importance of having an application strategy, let me share you a story from my personal experience in my first application cycle. I begun the year knowing my main goal was to secure a TC at a top firm (though I had no further idea as to which type of firm it should be), but I did not think too much about how exactly I should obtain that end. In September and early October, I started doing what everyone else at my university was doing: investing time in attending law firm events, reading the news from time to time, and taking part in some extracurriculars to add to my CV.

At that time, I was very pleased with my efforts relative to my peers, and I felt I was progressing well. Come the end of October however, I already heard from some friends that they had submitted applications at a couple of law firms – and their deadlines had already passed. This was an initial warning sign which put me on guard, so I decided to actually start researching and writing some applications. Nonetheless, as I had no previous experience with application researching and writing, the initial process was slow and frustrating. Simultaneously, academic life became significantly more intense, with deadlines for new formative and projects almost every week. As such, I begun procrastinating on my applications. Then, I once again found myself shocked to find out, this time at the end of November, that several deadlines for firms I was interested in had passed. This time, I became really annoyed at myself and started understanding the urgency of the situation. I looked up an application tracker and noted down dates.

To my horror, I realised 4 or 5 firms I had intended to apply to had a deadline that very week. Another 4 or 5 all had deadlines the next week, and so on until the end of December. I thus begun researching and writing, but I did not have more than half of a day to dedicate to any firm. All my applications were rushed – my why law reasoning wasn’t convincing, I did not identify any law firms’ unique selling points, my writing style was verbose, my structure unclear, and the application was riddled with typos and errors. In that cycle, I did not end up progressing past the application stage even once. I imagine many of other applicants will have had similar experiences.

Next year, I took my career goals a lot more seriously. In early September I constructed a through and application strategy and followed my detailed plan every week until the winter. I ended the cycle with four VS offers at MC/elite US firms and then converted to three TC offers. While my application strategy was by no means the only factor, I am convincing I would not have been nearly as successful as I was without it. To list just some of the benefits which make a well-constructed strategy essential for maximising chances of success:

• It enables you to space out your efforts to avoid felling overloaded at the end.
• It gives you more time to conduct through firm research, to draft and redraft your applications to improve quality, and to proofread extensively to find any errors.
• It enables you to hold yourself accountable and avoid missing out on applying for firms that could have been the perfect fit.

Thus, I advise you to take your time to carefully read through the following sections, to consider how they apply to your individual situation, and to subsequently craft your strategy accordingly.

2) How many law firms should I apply to?​

A first important point to consider is how many applications you will aim to submit by the end of the cycle. The question as to the ideal number of VS/TC applications is a controversial one. Firstly, it is not the kind of question that admits of a simple answer. Instead, it will be highly depended on the situation and career interests of each applicant. Secondly, there is significant substantive disagreement as to what approach is more successful. Some top recruiters and top applicants advise to be 100% focused on producing the highest possible quality of applications and to therefore only choose around 6-8 firms. Others argue that applications are more of a number's game, as the success rate at some top firms in the City is bellow 1%. Thus, they see the application process as a “number’s game” and advise on applying to as many firms as possible - sometimes in excess of 50 or 60.

I have known candidates who have been successful with both approaches, and I think there is some truth to both perspectives. On the one hand, as we well know, the application process is extremely competitive. Hence, there is not much of a point in submitting an application which does not have a high quality of research and high-quality written answers - it will have virtually no chance of being progressed. I have known people who were initially writing applications very quickly and got rejected 20 or 30 times consecutively. Upon changing their strategy to a quality-focused one, they progressed with half of the firms they subsequently applied to.

On the other hand, it is undeniable that luck is also a very significant factor, and that you should therefore aim to maximize your chances by submitting a high number of applications. In my own experience, some of the applications I had spent most time and effort on, and which I thought had some of my best writing, ended up being rejected at first stage. At the same time, some of the applications which I knew had some room for improvement ended up being progressed and eventually secured me TC offers. In my opinion, this could not be accounted by anything other than the role of luck - if anything, the firms that ended up progressing me tended to be the firms which I would have expected to be more selective. As such, I don't think you can ever write to a high enough standard that you eliminate the luck factor. Graduate recruitment teams review dozens and sometimes hundreds of applications per day, they have to reject the vast majority, and there is no perfectly objective metric to assess your application on. Some recruiters might place more emphasis on grades, some on your work experience, some on how convincing your motivations are and the quality of your written answers, some on WG/SJT scores, some on your university and degree, some on your extracurriculars and prizes, and so on. When comparing two strong applications that score well most of these categories, there is an unavoidable element of subjectivity in the recruiter's choice as to what criteria to prioritize. Since you don't know beforehand what a particular recruiter's attitude will be on the day they review your application, there is a strong argument to be made to apply to as many firms as possible. This is the only way to maximize your chances of having your application assessed by a recruiter who happens to place more emphasis on the criteria you score best in. From my personal experience, the very best of candidates (who do very well in all the aforementioned categories) only end up with a VS offer for every 1/3-1/4 of their applications.

Where does this leave you? In my opinion, as with many other things in life, the truth often lies, unclaimed, in the middle. The strategy I would advise you to employ, and the one which led to my success, is to aim to submit as many high-quality (but not necessarily absolutely perfect) applications as possible. That is, you should never submit an application just for the sake of a theoretical chance of progressing if you have not spent a sufficient amount of time researching the firm, and then writing and reviewing the application. At the same time, you cannot only be focused on attaining the absolute best – to illustrate this point, imagine you are conducting your firm research. First, you spend several hours exhausting all online resources: not only the big ones like the firm’s website, Chambers Student and the Chambers and Legal 500 rankings, but also all the legal press publications like Law.com and The Lawyer. While this is still a significantly better effort than the vast majority of applicant put in (and in my experience, definitely suffices for success), if you are 100% focused on quality you can go above and beyond that. You can reach out to many of the firm’s lawyers on LinkedIn, complete Forage experiences, contact recruiters, look for the firm’s podcasts or YouTube videos, seek to attend lots of events with the firm, and so on and so forth. Evidently, in this process you can definitely get past a point of diminishing returns – you should not spend 50 hours of work on every application to ensure you get to that absolute 100% level of quality. Assuming for illustrative purposes that writing quality could be quantified, you will have much better chances of securing a TC by sending 20 applications at 95% potential quality rather than sending four applications closer to 100%.

Thus, I think you should focus on starting to write high quality applications, and then try to write as many as you can. You might find that at the beginning it takes you longer to write great answers, but as you go through the application process and you improve your research and drafting skills, your pace might significantly improve. Initially, it took me around 2-3 weeks to have a great application, but by January I could write an application at the same level of quality in around 2 days. You will have to assess your own availability and pace to estimate how many applications you can aim to submit.

Finally, are there any actual concrete recommendations to leave you with? Firstly, in most circumstances, if you want to have at least a decent shot at securing a TC, you should not aim at anything under 10 applications. Secondly, assuming you are in a position to invest a substantial amount of time and effort in this application cycle, I think submitting around 20 high-quality applications should be attainable for most candidates. From personal experience, most people who have secured a TC have submitted at least around this number of applications. Finally, assuming you can make applications your absolute priority, it is possible to end up submitting around 40-50 good applications by the end of the cycle.

3) How should you choose the law firms you apply?​

While a higher number of good applications increases chances of a VS/TC offer, you should definitely avoid applying for a law firm you have no genuine interest in. Firstly, it is difficult to present convincing fictitious motivations, and recruiters are likely to catch on to it. Secondly, there is no real point in dedicating two years of your life to a job involving work you will dislike. Unfortunately, there are many stories of trainees who end up feeling trapped in their job and how end up wishing to ‘upgrade’ their TCs.

Nonetheless, you also should not be overly selective. An interest in a law firm is neither something you are born with, nor does it appear like love at first sight. It is rather something that you develop as you are learning about a firm’s unique selling points and the work in its practice areas. Thus, before you rule out lots and lots of law firms you feel no initial attraction towards, consider investing some time in reading about the firm and understanding its work and business.

In terms of practical advice for your application strategy, I think choosing the law firms to apply to should involve two steps:

• Step 1: Gouging initial interest: at this step, your aim is just to get an overview of the legal landscape in the UK and come up with a longer list of firms you could potentially want to apply for. Factors to consider are the type of law firm, seats, practice area reputation, location, salary, training, culture are all factors which you can and should consider. As you cannot invest too much time researching any particular firm here, the best resources are publications with firm overviews, including the Chambers Student Guide, The Lawyer, and TCLA.
• Step 2: After you have made up a list of firms, you will then have to decide which of those you plan to actually apply for. For this step, there are three factors a candidate should consider:
• The level of interest you have in each firm – to determine your level of interest, you should expand on the research you have conducted at the first step. It is arguable that among the many factors you should consider, the availability of preferred seats and practice area strengths are the most important. This is because the practice areas you experience in your TC are the only ones you can qualify in – and that will be the decision with the biggest impact on your career as a commercial solicitor. As such, you would be well advised to read some introductory pieces explaining the work of different practice areas (such as the ones offered by Chambers or in TCLA’s courses) or to complete some virtual work experiences. After you have identified the practice areas of interest, you can use the Chambers UK Guide 2024 to find the best law firms for each.
• The level of interest each firm is likely to have in you: since an application is a two way street, you also must consider whether a firm you are interested in is likely to be interested in you. Consider what the firms says they are looking for/is generally known to look for – how much will they care about your grades, your university and degree, and specific skills and attributes. You should then aim to prioritise applying for law firms that are emphasizing your strengths and avoid applying for the firms that would take the biggest issues with your weaknesses.
• Diversification: many applicants make the mistake of only applying for elite US/MC/SC firms. Like for a financial investment, when investing your time and effort you should seek maximize success chances by not putting all your eggs in one basket. Even if a candidate has a strong interest in once particular category of firm, they should diversify by sending at least a few other applications to different types. This includes City and international law firms, large national, regional and high street firms. If your objective of becoming a commercial solicitor takes priority over the type of firm, it is not a sensible strategy to only apply to the highest echelon of firms. Furthermore, even if your primary objective is to work on the highest value cross-border work at US/MC/SC firms, it is still better to have a diversified application approach. If you are unsuccessful in your direct applications for the firms you are most interested in, you might have a higher chance of eventually ending up there as a solicitor if you first do your TC elsewhere. Part of the reason why the TC application process is so competitive is that firms have to invest a lot of money and time in the programme. From the SQE course and exams fees to maintenance grants and high graduate salaries, many firms are not getting a proportional return on the investment during the TC period. This is because at trainee level you will not be able to provide clients with direct legal counsel – and the rates firms can charge clients on a billable hour of a trainee’s time are significantly lower than after qualification. However, after one becomes a solicitor, they become very profitable for their law firms. Based on current figures, estimates are that an NQ at a top firm can bring in in excess of 500,000 pounds of profits after deducting their salary and taxes. As such, the bargaining position when applying for junior associate roles changes dramatically compared to when applying for a TC. In a hot market, it is not uncommon for firms to pay referral bonuses and signing bonuses in the tens of thousands of pounds. All that is to say, a lateral move after qualification might give you significantly higher odds of getting into your dream firm.

4) When should you apply?​

After figuring out roughly how many firms you want to apply for, and you decide on which firms to prioritize, it is essential to make an application schedule. This will enable you to space out your efforts and hold yourself accountable over the next four months, which will ensure you do not get overloaded come December. While the details of constructing your schedule will vary based on your personal circumstances, by and in large you can follow these steps:

• Look up the deadlines for each firm and whether the application is rolling or not.
• Note them down into your calendar, so you can properly visualize the next period.
• Allocate a period from 4-5 days to a maximum of two weeks for the completion of each application.
• At the beginning, you can allocate a longer amount of time for the completion of your first applications. However, as you become more familiar with the research and writing process, and you require less reviews and input from other people, you will pick up pace and you should be able to finish an application in 4-5 days.
• In allocating your timeslots for each application, unless there is an impending deadline for other firms, prioritize rolling applications first.
• With experience, the quality of your research and writing will improve. Thus, if there are firms you are particularly interested in who also have a non-rolling process, I would advise you to allocate them a week later on in the application cycle. This will also give you more time to seek to interact with the firm through an event or a virtual work experience.
• If you are also applying/attending open days and other firm events that you could mention in your application, try to allocate an application timeslot subsequent to the event.

5) For what opportunity?​

Firstly, for each application you will need to decide whether you are pursuing vacation schemes or direct TC. With some firms, which announced that they only recruit through vacation schemes, you will not have a choice in this regard. With others, although they might open applications for the direct TC track, they will still primarily recruit through vacation schemes. This is why the general rule is that you should not pursue direct TC applications. Firms like to get to know candidates over a longer period of time before making them am offer. As brilliant as an applicant might be, it will be substantially more difficult to convince a firm to commit to making a substantial investment into their training after only meeting them for a day during an Assessment Centre. This is why you should only choose to pursue a direct TC instead of a VS application if:

• You have extensive experience working in the legal field (paralegal roles, previous vacation schemes etc) you should prioritise direct TC applications, or
• The firm is known to recruit a substantial part of its cohort from the direct TC track, or
• You have specific visa requirements, or
• The VS application window is closed but the TC application window is still open

The other type of opportunity you will need to consider are open days or other firm events. While it is generally helpful to meet a firm before making an application, you should prioritise VS/TC applications. Your strategy will not be administratively workable if you try to make an open day application for every firm you are making a VS/TC application, and if you are only sending the VS/TC application after attending the event. As such, I advise you to only change your VS/TC application schedule around 3-5 open days you want to attend at the firms you are most interested in.

4: interviews and assessment centres:

The second half of this post (unfortunately we are only half way through lmfao) is focused on interviews and ACs, something which I receive dozens of PMs about each week. Having done around a dozen interviews, I have discovered a specific set of tips that I believe are important to ensure maximum chance of success. I hope this helps you all in this next cycle. 🥲

The most important thing is to be specific and analytical. Talking too generally or vague about things will lead to weaker outcomes. I will refer to an example of a question I was asked in one of my interviews to illustrate this: ‘how do law firms generate revenue and profit?’ It might be tempting to simply answer, ‘billing clients’ or to ‘ensure lawyers have matters to work on’.

However, a stronger answer would discuss how a firm can identify new market opportunities by seeking international clients, explore fast-pace sectors e.g., tech, open new offices, develop a clear relationship between offices, etc. Another aspect would be internal department work. If a firm is advising on a transaction = competition, finance and tax work from same client. 😀

I have quoted some of the posts I used, which helped me understand how to best prepare for competency, motivational, commercial and SJT style interviews. The best advice is don’t strive for perfection. It’s inevitable that you will make mistakes in this process. The key is to maintain confidence and clarity in the way you speak to the interviewers on the day. 🙂
​

1. Besides the classics (why you, why commercial law), some of the ones I encountered most often/heard about others encountering are:

• Tell me about a time you demonstrated teamwork
• Tell me about a time you demonstrated resilience/worked under pressure/solved a problem
• What are the key qualities a trainee at our firm needs?
• What is your biggest weakness?
• Tell me about a time you made a mistake
• Tell me about a time you worked with tight deadlines

2. The most important thing for me was just practice. I also had an issue dealing with nerves at first, but believe me, if you put yourself in VI conditions and just practice continuously for several hours, you will get a lot more accustomed to it. My advice would be to just take around 3-4 hours in which you do nothing but choose random questions, give yourself 1 minute to prepare and then record yourself for 1-2 minutes. You will see you will get better over time.

Besides this, my top two tips would be to:

1. Speak more slowly - this gives you more time to think and articulate your ideas and makes it less likely to to find yourself having to continuously rephrase midsentence; I also find speaking in this way makes me feel more in control and calms my nerves; and
2. Realize that your performance does not have to be perfect, but merely good enough. I think a lot of candidates end up overthinking and panicking when making the smallest mistake, which ends up derailing their entire speech. Being too perfectionistic in this way often works to your detriment. Thus, you should internalize the idea that it is fine if your response is not absolutely perfect - many candidates (myself included) have progressed by merely making sure we communicated decent substantive points in a reasonably clear and structured manner. You do not have to blow anyone away. If you start thinking in this way, it is more likely that when a small error inevitably occurs, you are able to overlook it and still have an overall good response.

My top tip would be to focus on doing well and not on being perfect. Many people go to ACs thinking they need to blow away the partners and the recruiters to succeed, but I think this is the wrong attitude to have. First of all, while your achievements and skills might be impressive for this stage, it is quite unlikely you will manage to overly impress anyone no matter how hard you try - you will know a lot less about any given commercial law subject than lawyer in the firm. Secondly, this attitude will make you feel even more stressed than you would normally be and will therefore likely impact your performance. If you will be assessed for a total time of a few hours, it is impossible to be perfect in every moment. When you notice an imperfection in an answer, the right reaction is to acknowledge it but then to move past it and make the best of the rest. Instead, the overly perfectionistic candidates tend to stress about it a lot more than they should, and in attempting to fix the initial mistake they do a lot more harm to their progression chances. People with this mindset thus often end up creating negative feedback loops for themselves: they make a small error, then they begin overthinking it, which decreases their self-confidence, which impacts their next answer, which in turn further intensifies their anxiety; a series of events which can end up completely derailing one's performance.

To avoid this, instead of aiming to excel everywhere, I would simply aim to perform well - to do a good job on every task and score well on every relevant assessment criterion. This boils down to using your preparation to make decent substantive points and communicate them in a clear and confident manner. If you manage to do this you will have performed better than the majority of candidates and in most cases should be enough to get you progressed - it did for me 4/4 times. If you reframe your task in this way, I think you should feel a lot less anxious about it: while perhaps it is difficult to convince yourself that you will pull of an extraordinary performance, you should feel a lot more confident in being able to respond sensibly to tasks and to cover all your bases well.

A final piece of advice I have for calming down on the day and to avoid blanking out is to take your time:

1. Firstly, taking your time before starting your answer. Instead of just jumping into a response the instance the interviewer stops speaking (which is a very natural temptation) take 3-4 seconds to think about and structure your answer. This will significantly decrease the number of times you find yourself blanking out mid-answer or having difficulty finding the right way to end a sentence.
2. Secondly, if you have difficulty with finding sensible points for a question, it is perfectly acceptable to request some thinking time - just say 'May I please take a minute to consider my answer?'. In the unlikely case you do not find anything after that, explain that you are unsure what to say; but also walk the interviewer through your thought process of your best guess.
3. Thirdly, aim to speak more slowly. When you are anxious, your hear rate goes up and you naturally start speaking at a higher pace, which is problematic in that this simply means taking less time to think as you answer. This naturally reduces how articulate and confident you seem, especially since speaking quickly more often leads you to losing your chain of thought or expressing yourself in unclear language. As such, try to slow down. Also, use strategic 2-3 second pauses in your speech to add emphasis to points and to get valuable thinking time as you are moving between the different parts of your answer.

Finally, know that just by getting to the AC you have proven yourself to be one of the very best candidates out of a huge pool, which means you have all it takes to succeed! Best of luck !

This is a guide for the purposes of preparing for competency interviews, be they in a VI, another intermediary step or an AC/final stage interview. The advice here is based on my personal approach, as I received VS offers from top US/MC firms 4/4 times I implemented it. This will include:

• A general step-by-step preparation guide
• Specific advice on preparing for VIs
• Specific advice on preparing for final stage competency interviews

A. The Step-by-step preparation guide

The essential method and process is the same, though you may want to vary the amount of time you invest in preparation at each step depending on the whether this is a VI, an intermediary or a final stage interview.

Step 1 - Preparing ideas for answers

The first and most difficult step in preparing for interviews is learning how to respond to a wide variety of questions. Of course, you cannot prepare beforehand for all potential variations of all potential interview questions. Furthermore, you do not want to learn answers by heart and then just repeat them in front of the interviewers - they are likely to sound robotic. However, by investing a substantial amount of time thinking about how you would go about answering to as many different questions as possible, you start learning how to describe your motivations and experiences in a flexible manner. This decreases the chances that you will be caught off-guard by any given question. It also increases the chances that, even if you have not prepared for a question you are being asked, you will find a somewhat sensible answer to it.

The first thing I would do when invited to an AC/interview (and for a video interview, but not in the same level of detail) would be to try to build a question bank to practice on. I would create a Word doc with a few big headings (like 'CV based questions’, ‘competency questions'; 'motivations/firm-specific questions', 'commercial awareness questions', situational judgement questions' etc) and firstly write down all the questions I could think of under each relevant heading. I would then look at my CV and find try to think of how I could leverage my experience to answer those questions. Finally, I would write 2-3 short bullet points answers under each question - I have found this helps with memorizing the ideas for your answers. This enabled me to (i) have the ideas ready to go in my mind for a high number of questions and (ii) to still sound natural as I had to go through the though process of formulating an answer in the actual interview (as I would not memorize a particular way to articular the ideas I noted down). It is also worth mentioning that at this step I would prepare particularly well for the questions I thought were very likely to come up (such as Why commercial law, Why the firm, Why me etc).

The second part of my preparation at this step involved searching for interview question banks on the internet - such as the one offered by TCLA here. While reading them, I would spend around 30 seconds on each question thinking of potential ways of answering them. I would then copy the questions I was having particular difficulty with and add them under the relevant heading in my word document. After finalizing this process, I would once again look at my CV and spend a longer amount of time thinking how to best answer each of them. Then, I would note down my ideas in short bullet points.

The final part was similar to the second, with the only difference being that I would search directly for examples of past questions asked by the firm I was interviewing at - resources that were useful were this TCLA forum and Glassdoor.


Step 2 - Practicing articulating your answers

Once I had found the right ideas as to how to answer most interview questions, the second step of preparation involved improving my ability to articulate them. Despite the initial awkwardness of this method, I have found it incredibly useful to simply turn my laptop's camera on, pick one question at random, give myself a few seconds to think, and then record my answer. Subsequently, I would watch the recording with as critical an attitude as possible to see the parts I was struggling with the most. Then I would repeat this process again and again until I was happy with the way I was answering a given question.

A point worth noting is that as I was deciding at random which question to respond to, I would try to tweak the specific phrasing of the question in my mind. Thus, instead of just learning how to answer 'Why do you want to pursue a career in commercial law?', I would learn to answer many variations of the same type of question, such as 'How did your interest in commercial law originate?', 'Why commercial law rather than another area of the law?', 'Why do you want to be a commercial solicitor rather than a commercial barrister?' and so on. Once again, by following this approach, I would learn how to be flexible in formulating my ideas to best suit the exact question the interviewer would be asking me.


Step 3 - Mock interviews

Especially for any AC/final stage interviews, mock interviews are an incredibly useful preparation tool. After you have improved your interview skills as much as you could by firstly preparing your best ideas for answers, and then preparing the best way to articulate them, you should now seek to further improve both your ideas and your capacity to communicate them by getting feedback from others. Hence, if you can find someone with VS/TC interview experience (or even just experience with commercial law/interviews in general), it would be helpful to get them to do a mock interview for you.

Moreover, getting more familiar with the 'interview experience' beforehand contributes a lot to your ability to calm your nerves and do your best on the big day. As such, I would advise you to reach out to people who could help you with this, even if they are not part of your immediate circle. You will be surprised how many people will be willing to help you out!


Step 4 - Getting into the right mindset

Finally, although this may sound a bit cliche, try to go into the interview with a positive attitude. Remind yourself that just by reaching this stage, you have demonstrated to be an exceptionally competitive candidate. Acknowledge the fact that since the firm chose to meet you out of so many other applicants, it means you have everything you need to succeed - whether that means success with this firm or another.

Finally, although I appreciate how hard it may be, try to not put an excessive amount of pressure on yourself. Meditate on your journey and how far you've come and accept that as long as you do your best, you will have nothing to blame yourself for. Going through these thought processes the night and morning before the interviews helped me a lot with reducing my anxiety and my improved my ability to show a composed yet enthusiastic attitude.


B. Additional advice for VIs

Although they do differ on a firm-by-firm basis, VI questions tend on the most part to be more formulaic and predictable than at final stage interviews. This is a factor that is worth taking into consideration when considering how to prepare. The questions that come up in VIs tend to be in one of the following categories:

• The classics: Why you, Why the firm, Why commercial law - these almost always feature in one form or another. Make sure to have a very well-prepared answer.
• Further motivational questions: Why did you initially decide to study law, What other careers did you consider, What do you like and dislike about different types of work, what practice areas/sectors are you interested in etc.
• Competency questions: Tell me about a time you demonstrated teamwork skills/time-management/innovation/creative thinking/integrity etc.
• Situational judgement questions: What would you do in X scenario (eg. you have multiple competing deadlines and you feel your work product will suffer as a result).
• General commercial awareness question: tell us about a news story you have been following and what are its impacts on the economy/the legal market/the firm/the firm's clients, what is a business you admire, who are the firm's competitors? why do the firm's clients keep coming back to the firm?
• Curveballs: Besides variations of these types of questions, the only other type of question you should prepare for is potential curveballs. However, you can't really predict a curveball, so the only thing you can do it to try to train yourself to think quickly and be flexible in how you leverage your experience. To prepare, search for curveball interview question banks, pick questions at random and do your best to try to come up with sensible answers.

My general advice would be to invest the most of your preparation time in practicing until you have really well-rehearsed answers for the most common questions in each category. Besides that, I have listed here two pointers which were significantly helpful in elevating my VI performances:

• One of the biggest issues most candidates face is being flexible with their pre-prepared answers around the specific time limit of each VI. Try to get to a point where you can, on the spot, answer both the independent questions and the broader combinations of questions in 1 minute, 1.5 minute, and 2-minute timeframes. Then record yourself and assess your performance. The more you do this, the more will you improve your ability to answer different variations of questions in varying timeframes.
• Do not overcommit when you first start answering a question. This was by far the biggest issue for me last year. I would try to be structured and signpost, so I would start my answer by saying 'I will give you three/four reasons why ...'. However, midway through articulating my answer I would realise I did not have enough time to comprehensively state what I indented to. Thus, I would have to either sacrifice on the quality of my explanations, or just not talk through everything I said I would, neither of which is a good look. As such, when in doubt, go for less rather than more. Your purpose should not be to blow away the recruiters, but to simply communicate good substantive points in a clear, concise, and composed manner.

C) Additional advice for final stage interviews:

The first pointer for more specific final stage interview preparation is about further researching the firm. At a final stage interview, you should expect a lot of scrutiny and sometimes pushback on your motivations for why the firm and your understanding of its operations. As such, you should invest time into refreshing and then researching the firm a lot more than you did for the purpose of the written application.

In terms of areas that you should focus on with the further research, I would include the following:

• The basic facts: these include some important pieces of information that you should simply know about the firm, as they can easily come up at one point or another in a final interview. This includes the firm’s London practice areas, spread of international offices, global practice area/sector reputation, core clients, financial results, history in the City and international expansion, any announced strategy changes etc.
• Facts around your motivations for why the firm: research to find out if the unique selling points (USPs) you have identified in your written application are actually truly unique, or it they apply (at least to a certain extent) to other firms as well. If they do, look for ways to further individualize the firm in that regard. You should also just look for any recent news or developments related to those USPs. Moreover, consider whether the personal substantive interests you have linked with the firm’s USPs can withstand scrutiny, and the degree to which any of your experiences support this. Anticipate follow-up questions and pushback and prepare for this.
• General firm-related news: essentially, you want to be informed around any important events that may be of relevance to your understanding of the firm. These include any big new deal/cases that the firm has recently advised, any big clients it has won, top partners poached from rival firms (whether here or in other important jurisdictions), partners the firm lost to its rivals, legal press awards/rankings, financial performance of different practice areas.

Unexpected but commonly encountered questions: I will list here some ‘categories’ of questions that I was personally surprised to see take such a significant part of my final stage competency interviews. In retrospect, I know these are some of the questions I would advise my past self to better prepare for:

• CV-based questions: the general advice here is to be prepared to explain and answer follow-ups about any experience or achievement you have written on your CV, even if you have not referred to it in your application or interview. This applies to experiences in the more distant past as well – around half of one of my VS interviews was based around two non-law related competitions I participated in when still in high school.
• Academic-focused questions: your interviewer will expect you to know your academic pathway well and to be highly reflective about it. Be prepared to talk about your GCSE performance, reasons behind your A-levels subject choices and performance, reasons for your university degree choice and module choices, and an explanation of your performance and general experience in individual modules and in the degree in general.
• Applications strategy: you should be able to explain to the interviewer what other firms you have applied for and lay out a cogent application strategy. The reasons behind your application to other firms should (to the greatest possible extent) also apply to the specific firm you are interviewing with. To the extent they do not apply to the chosen firm, you should be able to explain why your ‘why this firm’ reasons trump the ‘why the other firms’ reasons.
• Practice areas understanding: your interviewer will expect you to understand the operations and basic features of the firm’s most important practice areas. You should understand what exactly the legal service is that a particular practice provides, how it differs from services provided by the other practices, why do the clients need it, who the main clients in the space are, and what the usual tasks are at each level of seniority (trainee, junior associate, senior associate, partner).
• Legal market knowledge: while very detailed knowledge of the legal market is not necessarily expected, it is definitely desirable, and you will get bonus points if you are able to show it off. Regardless, you should still be able to place the firm in the context of the competition in three main ways: (i) know which are the most similar firms to the one you are interviewing with in terms of general features – what ‘type’ of firm it is, and how does it differ from the other ‘types’?; (ii) know who the firms toughest competitors are in each of its main practice areas – who else is a market leader?; (iii) are there any significant shifts happening in the market? Even if not directly related to the firm, moves like Paul, Weiss’ unprecedented London expansion, Allen & Overy’s merger with Shearman Sterling, Latham & Watkins’ string of exists, Slaughter and May’s problems with the ‘best friends’ model, and Freshfields’ US expansion and recent rebrand are all big changes which change the dynamics of the legal market and that you should therefore be aware of.

5: Interviews and assessment centres (II):

Another question I was often asked about was a mixture between motivation and commercial awareness: ‘why this firm’, ‘who are our main competitors’, ‘what distinguishes our firm from our competitors’, etc. I would often focus on a few things to curate my answers. Knowing how the city operates and each firms USPs is a key starting point, but other things to consider are:

1) a firm’s core practice areas and specialisms.
2) the Chambers and Legal 500 rankings of the practice areas in question.
3) firms that rank in the same tier (Band 1/2).
4) position in the City of London: is it a big city or elite US/MC/SC law firm?
5) what clients regularly instruct a firm and the industry or sector they belong to.

As part of my preparation, I would research the firms using above criteria to identify their main competitors. For example, Paul, Weiss is strong in private equity, comparable to other law firms such as Kirkland, Latham and Weil. Akin is very strong in restructuring, comparable to Weil and Milbank. Covington is strong in life sciences, as is Cooley and Ropes & Gray. 🙂

When I started writing applications for Spring / Summer VS’, I didn’t know much about private equity, debt/equity finance or capital markets, so struggled with preparation. Understanding a firm’s market position and focus will help with preparation for wider questions about why that firm and who their competitors are. Below are examples for Paul, Weiss and Willkie: 🙂
​

Thank you again for the kind words Chris😄!! For the question about Paul, Weiss' position in the City, I would describe it as a middle-to-large office with a full service offering tailored for PE clients and a strategic focus on high end mandates. While its English law practice is very new, you can definitely argue this will not be an impediment for delivering the highest quality of legal services on the most complex matters. Firstly, Paul, Weiss has poached some of the most renowned practitioners in most of its practice areas - leaders in their fields such as Neel Sachdev in leveraged finance and Nicole Kar in antitrust. Secondly, Paul, Weiss' expansion was quite unique in that it poached many ready-made teams of partners and associates. Thus, many of its lawyers will know how to seamlessly work together from day one. Even for those that had not worked in the same teams before, integration is likely to have been a lot easier than normally would have been the case. The legal press reported that the majority had a background at either Kirkland or Linklaters, which means that they will have both been trained in the same style and will have likely known each other and had working relations.

For the second question, I would firstly comment that the more relevant competitors of Paul, Weiss' would be US and not UK firms. This is both because of Paul, Weiss' focus on PE, in which the US firms tend to dominate, and simply because the clients the firm is hoping to represent are US-based PE firms who need advice and services on deals/matters with English law elements. Among the US competitors, because on Paul, Weiss' high-end focus, those will mostly be the firms in the V10 and (to a somewhat lower extent) the V20. The Vault rankings are of course not an objective ranking of expertise, but I would argue they are a rough indicator to the "band" of prestige a US firms places into, especially in relation to high-end transactional matters. The lower down the list you go, the greater the likelihood that you won't often find that particular firm advising on the highest value mandates.

Now within the V20, different firms will have different practice area strengths. and will target different client bases. To identify the most important competitors, you want to identify the firms that Paul, Weiss' will most often find themselves pitching against when trying to win a mandate. Thus, the ones you want to pick are those whose core client base consists of PE clients. Since Skadden's central focus is on corporate M& and its core client base consists of multinational corporations, I would not name them among Paul, Weiss' greatest competitors. Normally I would have made a similar comment on Davis Polk, as its focus is on capital markets and the most important clients are investment banks like JP Morgan and Morgan Stanley. However, after its recent expansion in London I would say the firm is now getting closer to an equal split of M&A/PE practitioners and capital markets ones. More importantly, Davis Polk's London office has previously advised Apollo on a number of mandates, and Apollo is the one key client that Paul, Weiss has a very strong relationship to in the US; and which it now aims to also represent on as many London matters as possible.

Nonetheless, looking at both US rankings and UK practice area focus and client base, the firms I would consider to be Paul, Weiss' foremost competitors are: Kirkland, Latham, Simpson Thatcher, and Weil.

The basic distinction is that with debt financing a company will borrow money from a lender and will in return make a promise to return the initial borrowed sum + an agreed upon interest. With equity financing, the company gets money from an investor but never has to pay the investor back in return. Instead, in exchange for the money the investor gets equity in the company, which is just another term for shares in the company/a percentage of the ownership of the company. Equity financing always takes place when a private company goes public, in that the company issues shares to the public through an IPO and in exchange gets capital which can be used for further growth. However, equity company can also be used by a private company in a private transaction, when existing shareholders agree to sell a part of their shares or issue new shares to a particular investor/group of investors.

To look in more detail at debt financing, the main two methods to obtain it are loans (normally taken from a bank) and bonds (which can be issued to any investors). The difference is that loans normally have to be repaid on a monthly period (the borrower pays a proportional part of the total borrowed sum + interest) while with bonds, the issuer (ie the company that borrowed the money) only has to make the interest payments on a regular basis - the initial borrowed sum (or "the principal") is paid all at once at the end of the agreed upon repayment period (the "maturity date"). While there are a number of other differences that are relevant in assessing the pros/cons of using loans or bonds, for the sake of comparison with equity financing I will look at only advantages and disadvantages that equally apply to both. It should be noted however that in PE generally and for buyouts in particular PE firms normally use highly leveraged loans. Essentially, to minimize the amount of investor capital spent on any transaction (and thus to maximize the total number of profitable transactions a given fund can enter into), a PE firm will normally finance around 75-80% of the cost of a buyout by getting a loan from a bank and then offering as security the assets of the target company itself.

Now, to list some of the main advantages of debt financing I can think of:

• Allows the company (and the controlling PE firm) to keep compete control of the target company. This is particularly important for the PE firm to be able to implement its growth/efficiency improvement plans and its desired exit strategy.
• Allows the PE firm to keep all the dividends and profits from selling the company later on.
• It is often makes for a simpler and more standard negotiation process both for the financing deal and for the actual buyout. For an industry like PE where deals tend to be very fast paced and where targets normally have a number of suitors, this is also a benefit that should not be understated.
• Interest payments are tax-deductible.

Whereas the main advantages of equity financing are:

• It does not add any financial burdens on the target company. This means it should have more capital which can go towards investments in growth rather than repayment of debt. It also decreases risks of insolvency.
• It often means working with institutional investors or huge corporates with significant resources and expertise, which can make them invaluable partners for growing a business. A very successful example of such a relationship is that between Open AI and Microsoft.

Hi @Chris Brown and @legal18 I would describe Willkie in London as a middle-sized office of a top US firm specializing in a number of transactional (particularly PE and insurance work) and contentious practices (particularly competition litigation and white collar crime). If we look at competitors at a firm-wide level, the most similar types of firms I would identify would be the likes of Milbank, Cleary, and Gibson Dunn. Looking at the firm's wider strategy, we can see Willkie has grown rapidly in London with a focus on servicing its PE client base but also seeking to have a well-rounded and well-hedged practice; and thus, expanded to other areas when the opportunity arose. Within PE, while it does not have quite as strong of a reputation as a Kirkland, Latham or Simpson Thatcher, this is mainly due to the difference in size of practice - in 2024, I know they had the smallest number of practitioners of all firms in the same Chambers band ranking. As such, I would classify them as a having a smaller but premium PE offering, similar to that of Paul, Weiss, Gibson Dunn, and Ropes & Gray, who I would deem to be their primary competitors in this space.

As for your second question, I would firstly advise you not to worry. As you might know, Willkie has a reputation for being a US firm with a great culture, and I think this is one of the cases where this is not simply a result of effective marketing. My interview experience was one of the best ones I had, as I felt constantly encouraged by the partners and felt they really wanted to see me succeed. Having gotten to speak to both recruitment partners more during the vacation scheme, I further confirmed my impression that they are some of the kindest people I had come across in a law firm context. As such, try not to feel too nervous about the fact that you are speaking to a someone who is so much more senior than you - they will do their best to make you feel at ease in that regard.

My main tips for preparation are ones that are applicable to many other interviews: firstly, know your answers to the usual motivational/competency questions really well and try to add as much insights and analysis to them as you can. Secondly, brush up on your commercial awareness, and aim to particularly improve your understanding of the key practices/sectors the firm operates in. Thirdly, when in difficulty, take a little time to think and then given your best guess and/or externalize your thought process - this is the approach that led to some of the highest praise I have received in an interview context.

Best of luck !

I hope this post (despite its insane length) will help you guys to create application strategies, prepare for interviews and eventually securing several VS and DTC ACs. I used this approach this past cycle and it enabled me to succeed. I wish you all the best of luck with the upcoming application cycle! It’s a tough process but all of you have what it takes to perform well! 🥳​

 

[Alturistic whale]

Following my previous post, where I discussed my experience last application cycle and where I applied, this post is about application strategy and interview preparation. I hope it helps those of you looking to apply to VS/DTC this cycle. I’d like to apologise in advance if this post ends up being incredibly long to read. I will begin with quoting my VS/DTC forum post for context:



1: how to select which firms to apply to:

The first thing I focused on was figuring out the things I wanted from a firm. There are so many different variables that must be considered as each and every firm is unique. However, in the context of city law firms, there are also several overlapping characteristics, which can help to determine the type of firm to apply to. For me, I looked at some of the following: 😅

a) academic requirements e.g., strong or high 2:1, AAA-ABB at A-level, strong GCSEs.
b) international nature of the firm - where does the firm have offices (e.g., Europe/Asia/USA)?
c) nature of work - multi-jurisdictional, cross-border transactions and disputes?
d) what clients does the firm have and do they instruct the firm regularly on mandates?
e) practice area strengths - corporate/disputes split focus, full-service vs specialist firm?
f) training contract structure (4 seats, 6 seats, non-rotational, compulsory seats, etc).
g) trainee intake size (larger intake of 50-100 or smaller intake of less than 25).
h) level of responsibility for trainees - hands on learning, leaner teams, larger teams etc.
i) trainee retention rates and firm culture - are trainees kept on as NQs and if so what %?
j) track to partnership - does the firm primarily hire laterally or promote internally?

Based on the above, I figured I was attracted to US/MC/SC firms more than national or regional law firms. However, with hindsight I would have applied to more US firms. There were so many firms I didn’t know existed e.g., Cleary Gottlieb, Debevoise & Plimpton, Gibson Dunn and Weil, Gotshal & Manges, up until I joined this forum, so ensure you do your research. 😂

As this process is hyper competitive, it’s super important to know which firms are best suited to your particular interests and skills. There is virtually no point in applying to firms like Paul, Weiss or Fried Frank if private equity isn’t your primary interest. Similarly, if you know a small trainee intake isn’t the best, applying to firms like Davis Polk or Orrick won’t be beneficial.

One thing I would stress the importance of is to not only aim for elite US/MC/SC firms. Some of these top city firms receive 3,000 applications each year for only 50-100 TCs. It’s better to try diversify applications and target other types of firms e.g., large city firms (SH, AG, CRS, HFW, TS, etc.). There is always the option to laterally move as an NQ to an elite firm. 🙂

I would also stress the importance of academic expectations. If a firm states it looks for a high 2:1 (68%) and AAA at A-level, it wouldn’t be a wise decision for someone to apply if they had a 2:2 and CCC. Applying for firms w/o minimum grade requirements is another strategic way of increasing chance of success. This is because they assess applications holistically. 😅

2: Applying criteria to firms (example):

Once you reach the point where you shortlist a specific number of firms that you want to apply to for WVS, SVS or DTC, the next thing to do is to apply this criteria to firms. There are some firms that will be more aligned to someone’s experiences, skills, interests, goals, academics, competencies, etc. Focus on these firms and not ones with less compatibility. 🙂

I will use Willkie Farr & Gallagher as an example to explain the above. I knew I was interested in M&A/PE, litigation/arbitration, competition and restructuring. Willkie had strengths in all of these areas. Further, Willkie is an international NY HQ US firm working on cross-border, multi-jurisdictional deals and disputes. The firm has a small trainee intake of 6-7 per year.

This means trainees at Willkie are given earlier and greater responsibility, learning on-the-job, working in leaner teams. Based on Legal Cheek data, Willkie retains around 80% of its trainees, suggesting most NQs qualify into the firm. The TC is split into 4 6 month seats with mandatory seats in PE M&A/Insurance M&A and litigation, investigations and enforcement.

Based on the criteria I had, Willkie ticked most of the boxes. This made it easier for me when it came to narrowing down my choices. In effect, I knew Willkie was a perfect firm for me, based on the things I was looking for in a firm. I used this process for every firm and narrowed down to around 20 firms. As the cycle progressed, I’d applied to 25 firms in total.

3: Implementing an application strategy:

This is probably the hardest part of applying to firms. Forming an application strategy that will guide you through making VS/DTC applications is quite challenging, especially if it’s someone’s first cycle. Some questions that might come up are ‘why is an application strategy important?’, ‘is this more a numbers game or should I focus on producing fewer, high quality applications?’

I didn’t prepare a proper application strategy at the beginning of the cycle. As a result, 7/7 of all WVS applications I submitted resulted in a PFO (sad times for me). It was at this point I realised that I need to change my approach. I decided I wanted to focus on open day applications over VS/DTC applications. I used what I learned and implemented them into my applications. 😀

If you are interested in particular firms, I would recommend first applying to open days. They are not only great ways to learn more about a firm, but they also count as legal experience to include on applications and help you articulate your interest in that firm. I would also suggest completing forage courses for each firm where possible and attend virtual events. 🙂

Combining all these together will mean you can produce a super tailored, well-researched DTC and VS application. Speaking to future trainees either on LinkedIn or by arranging calls is also a great way of achieving this. Of course it’s not always possible to do things this way, but most of the time, it works. My application strategy is based on a post by @Andrei Radu (see below):



4: interviews and assessment centres:

The second half of this post (unfortunately we are only half way through lmfao) is focused on interviews and ACs, something which I receive dozens of PMs about each week. Having done around a dozen interviews, I have discovered a specific set of tips that I believe are important to ensure maximum chance of success. I hope this helps you all in this next cycle. 🥲

The most important thing is to be specific and analytical. Talking too generally or vague about things will lead to weaker outcomes. I will refer to an example of a question I was asked in one of my interviews to illustrate this: ‘how do law firms generate revenue and profit?’ It might be tempting to simply answer, ‘billing clients’ or to ‘ensure lawyers have matters to work on’.

However, a stronger answer would discuss how a firm can identify new market opportunities by seeking international clients, explore fast-pace sectors e.g., tech, open new offices, develop a clear relationship between offices, etc. Another aspect would be internal department work. If a firm is advising on a transaction = competition, finance and tax work from same client. 😀

I have quoted some of the posts I used, which helped me understand how to best prepare for competency, motivational, commercial and SJT style interviews. The best advice is don’t strive for perfection. It’s inevitable that you will make mistakes in this process. The key is to maintain confidence and clarity in the way you speak to the interviewers on the day. 🙂
​

5: Interviews and assessment centres (II):

Another question I was often asked about was a mixture between motivation and commercial awareness: ‘why this firm’, ‘who are our main competitors’, ‘what distinguishes our firm from our competitors’, etc. I would often focus on a few things to curate my answers. Knowing how the city operates and each firms USPs is a key starting point, but other things to consider are:

1) a firm’s core practice areas and specialisms.
2) the Chambers and Legal 500 rankings of the practice areas in question.
3) firms that rank in the same tier (Band 1/2).
4) position in the City of London: is it a big city or elite US/MC/SC law firm?
5) what clients regularly instruct a firm and the industry or sector they belong to.

As part of my preparation, I would research the firms using above criteria to identify their main competitors. For example, Paul, Weiss is strong in private equity, comparable to other law firms such as Kirkland, Latham and Weil. Akin is very strong in restructuring, comparable to Weil and Milbank. Covington is strong in life sciences, as is Cooley and Ropes & Gray. 🙂

When I started writing applications for Spring / Summer VS’, I didn’t know much about private equity, debt/equity finance or capital markets, so struggled with preparation. Understanding a firm’s market position and focus will help with preparation for wider questions about why that firm and who their competitors are. Below are examples for Paul, Weiss and Willkie: 🙂







I hope this post (despite its insane length) will help you guys to create application strategies, prepare for interviews and eventually securing several VS and DTC ACs. I used this approach this past cycle and it enabled me to succeed. I wish you all the best of luck with the upcoming application cycle! It’s a tough process but all of you have what it takes to perform well! 🥳​

Thanks Chris! Bookmarked this, saved it and will probably print it this evening! As always, a super detailed post filled with key info- thank you to all your contributions on the forum the past year! Any particular approaches you have to technical case studies/written? Or group tasks ('ve struggled with group tasks in the past particularly when there are louder participants) P.S, Pls don't leave the forum just yet 🥲

 

[llblawstudent]

Following my previous post, where I discussed my experience last application cycle and where I applied, this post is about application strategy and interview preparation. I hope it helps those of you looking to apply to VS/DTC this cycle. I’d like to apologise in advance if this post ends up being incredibly long to read. I will begin with quoting my VS/DTC forum post for context:



1: how to select which firms to apply to:

The first thing I focused on was figuring out the things I wanted from a firm. There are so many different variables that must be considered as each and every firm is unique. However, in the context of city law firms, there are also several overlapping characteristics, which can help to determine the type of firm to apply to. For me, I looked at some of the following: 😅

a) academic requirements e.g., strong or high 2:1, AAA-ABB at A-level, strong GCSEs.
b) international nature of the firm - where does the firm have offices (e.g., Europe/Asia/USA)?
c) nature of work - multi-jurisdictional, cross-border transactions and disputes?
d) what clients does the firm have and do they instruct the firm regularly on mandates?
e) practice area strengths - corporate/disputes split focus, full-service vs specialist firm?
f) training contract structure (4 seats, 6 seats, non-rotational, compulsory seats, etc).
g) trainee intake size (larger intake of 50-100 or smaller intake of less than 25).
h) level of responsibility for trainees - hands on learning, leaner teams, larger teams etc.
i) trainee retention rates and firm culture - are trainees kept on as NQs and if so what %?
j) track to partnership - does the firm primarily hire laterally or promote internally?

Based on the above, I figured I was attracted to US/MC/SC firms more than national or regional law firms. However, with hindsight I would have applied to more US firms. There were so many firms I didn’t know existed e.g., Cleary Gottlieb, Debevoise & Plimpton, Gibson Dunn and Weil, Gotshal & Manges, up until I joined this forum, so ensure you do your research. 😂

As this process is hyper competitive, it’s super important to know which firms are best suited to your particular interests and skills. There is virtually no point in applying to firms like Paul, Weiss or Fried Frank if private equity isn’t your primary interest. Similarly, if you know a small trainee intake isn’t the best, applying to firms like Davis Polk or Orrick won’t be beneficial.

One thing I would stress the importance of is to not only aim for elite US/MC/SC firms. Some of these top city firms receive 3,000 applications each year for only 50-100 TCs. It’s better to try diversify applications and target other types of firms e.g., large city firms (SH, AG, CRS, HFW, TS, etc.). There is always the option to laterally move as an NQ to an elite firm. 🙂

I would also stress the importance of academic expectations. If a firm states it looks for a high 2:1 (68%) and AAA at A-level, it wouldn’t be a wise decision for someone to apply if they had a 2:2 and CCC. Applying for firms w/o minimum grade requirements is another strategic way of increasing chance of success. This is because they assess applications holistically. 😅

2: Applying criteria to firms (example):

Once you reach the point where you shortlist a specific number of firms that you want to apply to for WVS, SVS or DTC, the next thing to do is to apply this criteria to firms. There are some firms that will be more aligned to someone’s experiences, skills, interests, goals, academics, competencies, etc. Focus on these firms and not ones with less compatibility. 🙂

I will use Willkie Farr & Gallagher as an example to explain the above. I knew I was interested in M&A/PE, litigation/arbitration, competition and restructuring. Willkie had strengths in all of these areas. Further, Willkie is an international NY HQ US firm working on cross-border, multi-jurisdictional deals and disputes. The firm has a small trainee intake of 6-7 per year.

This means trainees at Willkie are given earlier and greater responsibility, learning on-the-job, working in leaner teams. Based on Legal Cheek data, Willkie retains around 80% of its trainees, suggesting most NQs qualify into the firm. The TC is split into 4 6 month seats with mandatory seats in PE M&A/Insurance M&A and litigation, investigations and enforcement.

Based on the criteria I had, Willkie ticked most of the boxes. This made it easier for me when it came to narrowing down my choices. In effect, I knew Willkie was a perfect firm for me, based on the things I was looking for in a firm. I used this process for every firm and narrowed down to around 20 firms. As the cycle progressed, I’d applied to 25 firms in total.

3: Implementing an application strategy:

This is probably the hardest part of applying to firms. Forming an application strategy that will guide you through making VS/DTC applications is quite challenging, especially if it’s someone’s first cycle. Some questions that might come up are ‘why is an application strategy important?’, ‘is this more a numbers game or should I focus on producing fewer, high quality applications?’

I didn’t prepare a proper application strategy at the beginning of the cycle. As a result, 7/7 of all WVS applications I submitted resulted in a PFO (sad times for me). It was at this point I realised that I need to change my approach. I decided I wanted to focus on open day applications over VS/DTC applications. I used what I learned and implemented them into my applications. 😀

If you are interested in particular firms, I would recommend first applying to open days. They are not only great ways to learn more about a firm, but they also count as legal experience to include on applications and help you articulate your interest in that firm. I would also suggest completing forage courses for each firm where possible and attend virtual events. 🙂

Combining all these together will mean you can produce a super tailored, well-researched DTC and VS application. Speaking to future trainees either on LinkedIn or by arranging calls is also a great way of achieving this. Of course it’s not always possible to do things this way, but most of the time, it works. My application strategy is based on a post by @Andrei Radu (see below):



4: interviews and assessment centres:

The second half of this post (unfortunately we are only half way through lmfao) is focused on interviews and ACs, something which I receive dozens of PMs about each week. Having done around a dozen interviews, I have discovered a specific set of tips that I believe are important to ensure maximum chance of success. I hope this helps you all in this next cycle. 🥲

The most important thing is to be specific and analytical. Talking too generally or vague about things will lead to weaker outcomes. I will refer to an example of a question I was asked in one of my interviews to illustrate this: ‘how do law firms generate revenue and profit?’ It might be tempting to simply answer, ‘billing clients’ or to ‘ensure lawyers have matters to work on’.

However, a stronger answer would discuss how a firm can identify new market opportunities by seeking international clients, explore fast-pace sectors e.g., tech, open new offices, develop a clear relationship between offices, etc. Another aspect would be internal department work. If a firm is advising on a transaction = competition, finance and tax work from same client. 😀

I have quoted some of the posts I used, which helped me understand how to best prepare for competency, motivational, commercial and SJT style interviews. The best advice is don’t strive for perfection. It’s inevitable that you will make mistakes in this process. The key is to maintain confidence and clarity in the way you speak to the interviewers on the day. 🙂
​

5: Interviews and assessment centres (II):

Another question I was often asked about was a mixture between motivation and commercial awareness: ‘why this firm’, ‘who are our main competitors’, ‘what distinguishes our firm from our competitors’, etc. I would often focus on a few things to curate my answers. Knowing how the city operates and each firms USPs is a key starting point, but other things to consider are:

1) a firm’s core practice areas and specialisms.
2) the Chambers and Legal 500 rankings of the practice areas in question.
3) firms that rank in the same tier (Band 1/2).
4) position in the City of London: is it a big city or elite US/MC/SC law firm?
5) what clients regularly instruct a firm and the industry or sector they belong to.

As part of my preparation, I would research the firms using above criteria to identify their main competitors. For example, Paul, Weiss is strong in private equity, comparable to other law firms such as Kirkland, Latham and Weil. Akin is very strong in restructuring, comparable to Weil and Milbank. Covington is strong in life sciences, as is Cooley and Ropes & Gray. 🙂

When I started writing applications for Spring / Summer VS’, I didn’t know much about private equity, debt/equity finance or capital markets, so struggled with preparation. Understanding a firm’s market position and focus will help with preparation for wider questions about why that firm and who their competitors are. Below are examples for Paul, Weiss and Willkie: 🙂







I hope this post (despite its insane length) will help you guys to create application strategies, prepare for interviews and eventually securing several VS and DTC ACs. I used this approach this past cycle and it enabled me to succeed. I wish you all the best of luck with the upcoming application cycle! It’s a tough process but all of you have what it takes to perform well! 🥳​

Hey Chris, just wanted to say that as someone just about to embark on their first application cycle, this is like gold dust. Would you mind if I DM'd you about a personal question about my particular circumstances?

 

[AS24]

Following my previous post, where I discussed my experience last application cycle and where I applied, this post is about application strategy and interview preparation. I hope it helps those of you looking to apply to VS/DTC this cycle. I’d like to apologise in advance if this post ends up being incredibly long to read. I will begin with quoting my VS/DTC forum post for context:



1: how to select which firms to apply to:

The first thing I focused on was figuring out the things I wanted from a firm. There are so many different variables that must be considered as each and every firm is unique. However, in the context of city law firms, there are also several overlapping characteristics, which can help to determine the type of firm to apply to. For me, I looked at some of the following: 😅

a) academic requirements e.g., strong or high 2:1, AAA-ABB at A-level, strong GCSEs.
b) international nature of the firm - where does the firm have offices (e.g., Europe/Asia/USA)?
c) nature of work - multi-jurisdictional, cross-border transactions and disputes?
d) what clients does the firm have and do they instruct the firm regularly on mandates?
e) practice area strengths - corporate/disputes split focus, full-service vs specialist firm?
f) training contract structure (4 seats, 6 seats, non-rotational, compulsory seats, etc).
g) trainee intake size (larger intake of 50-100 or smaller intake of less than 25).
h) level of responsibility for trainees - hands on learning, leaner teams, larger teams etc.
i) trainee retention rates and firm culture - are trainees kept on as NQs and if so what %?
j) track to partnership - does the firm primarily hire laterally or promote internally?

Based on the above, I figured I was attracted to US/MC/SC firms more than national or regional law firms. However, with hindsight I would have applied to more US firms. There were so many firms I didn’t know existed e.g., Cleary Gottlieb, Debevoise & Plimpton, Gibson Dunn and Weil, Gotshal & Manges, up until I joined this forum, so ensure you do your research. 😂

As this process is hyper competitive, it’s super important to know which firms are best suited to your particular interests and skills. There is virtually no point in applying to firms like Paul, Weiss or Fried Frank if private equity isn’t your primary interest. Similarly, if you know a small trainee intake isn’t the best, applying to firms like Davis Polk or Orrick won’t be beneficial.

One thing I would stress the importance of is to not only aim for elite US/MC/SC firms. Some of these top city firms receive 3,000 applications each year for only 50-100 TCs. It’s better to try diversify applications and target other types of firms e.g., large city firms (SH, AG, CRS, HFW, TS, etc.). There is always the option to laterally move as an NQ to an elite firm. 🙂

I would also stress the importance of academic expectations. If a firm states it looks for a high 2:1 (68%) and AAA at A-level, it wouldn’t be a wise decision for someone to apply if they had a 2:2 and CCC. Applying for firms w/o minimum grade requirements is another strategic way of increasing chance of success. This is because they assess applications holistically. 😅

2: Applying criteria to firms (example):

Once you reach the point where you shortlist a specific number of firms that you want to apply to for WVS, SVS or DTC, the next thing to do is to apply this criteria to firms. There are some firms that will be more aligned to someone’s experiences, skills, interests, goals, academics, competencies, etc. Focus on these firms and not ones with less compatibility. 🙂

I will use Willkie Farr & Gallagher as an example to explain the above. I knew I was interested in M&A/PE, litigation/arbitration, competition and restructuring. Willkie had strengths in all of these areas. Further, Willkie is an international NY HQ US firm working on cross-border, multi-jurisdictional deals and disputes. The firm has a small trainee intake of 6-7 per year.

This means trainees at Willkie are given earlier and greater responsibility, learning on-the-job, working in leaner teams. Based on Legal Cheek data, Willkie retains around 80% of its trainees, suggesting most NQs qualify into the firm. The TC is split into 4 6 month seats with mandatory seats in PE M&A/Insurance M&A and litigation, investigations and enforcement.

Based on the criteria I had, Willkie ticked most of the boxes. This made it easier for me when it came to narrowing down my choices. In effect, I knew Willkie was a perfect firm for me, based on the things I was looking for in a firm. I used this process for every firm and narrowed down to around 20 firms. As the cycle progressed, I’d applied to 25 firms in total.

3: Implementing an application strategy:

This is probably the hardest part of applying to firms. Forming an application strategy that will guide you through making VS/DTC applications is quite challenging, especially if it’s someone’s first cycle. Some questions that might come up are ‘why is an application strategy important?’, ‘is this more a numbers game or should I focus on producing fewer, high quality applications?’

I didn’t prepare a proper application strategy at the beginning of the cycle. As a result, 7/7 of all WVS applications I submitted resulted in a PFO (sad times for me). It was at this point I realised that I need to change my approach. I decided I wanted to focus on open day applications over VS/DTC applications. I used what I learned and implemented them into my applications. 😀

If you are interested in particular firms, I would recommend first applying to open days. They are not only great ways to learn more about a firm, but they also count as legal experience to include on applications and help you articulate your interest in that firm. I would also suggest completing forage courses for each firm where possible and attend virtual events. 🙂

Combining all these together will mean you can produce a super tailored, well-researched DTC and VS application. Speaking to future trainees either on LinkedIn or by arranging calls is also a great way of achieving this. Of course it’s not always possible to do things this way, but most of the time, it works. My application strategy is based on a post by @Andrei Radu (see below):



4: interviews and assessment centres:

The second half of this post (unfortunately we are only half way through lmfao) is focused on interviews and ACs, something which I receive dozens of PMs about each week. Having done around a dozen interviews, I have discovered a specific set of tips that I believe are important to ensure maximum chance of success. I hope this helps you all in this next cycle. 🥲

The most important thing is to be specific and analytical. Talking too generally or vague about things will lead to weaker outcomes. I will refer to an example of a question I was asked in one of my interviews to illustrate this: ‘how do law firms generate revenue and profit?’ It might be tempting to simply answer, ‘billing clients’ or to ‘ensure lawyers have matters to work on’.

However, a stronger answer would discuss how a firm can identify new market opportunities by seeking international clients, explore fast-pace sectors e.g., tech, open new offices, develop a clear relationship between offices, etc. Another aspect would be internal department work. If a firm is advising on a transaction = competition, finance and tax work from same client. 😀

I have quoted some of the posts I used, which helped me understand how to best prepare for competency, motivational, commercial and SJT style interviews. The best advice is don’t strive for perfection. It’s inevitable that you will make mistakes in this process. The key is to maintain confidence and clarity in the way you speak to the interviewers on the day. 🙂
​

5: Interviews and assessment centres (II):

Another question I was often asked about was a mixture between motivation and commercial awareness: ‘why this firm’, ‘who are our main competitors’, ‘what distinguishes our firm from our competitors’, etc. I would often focus on a few things to curate my answers. Knowing how the city operates and each firms USPs is a key starting point, but other things to consider are:

1) a firm’s core practice areas and specialisms.
2) the Chambers and Legal 500 rankings of the practice areas in question.
3) firms that rank in the same tier (Band 1/2).
4) position in the City of London: is it a big city or elite US/MC/SC law firm?
5) what clients regularly instruct a firm and the industry or sector they belong to.

As part of my preparation, I would research the firms using above criteria to identify their main competitors. For example, Paul, Weiss is strong in private equity, comparable to other law firms such as Kirkland, Latham and Weil. Akin is very strong in restructuring, comparable to Weil and Milbank. Covington is strong in life sciences, as is Cooley and Ropes & Gray. 🙂

When I started writing applications for Spring / Summer VS’, I didn’t know much about private equity, debt/equity finance or capital markets, so struggled with preparation. Understanding a firm’s market position and focus will help with preparation for wider questions about why that firm and who their competitors are. Below are examples for Paul, Weiss and Willkie: 🙂







I hope this post (despite its insane length) will help you guys to create application strategies, prepare for interviews and eventually securing several VS and DTC ACs. I used this approach this past cycle and it enabled me to succeed. I wish you all the best of luck with the upcoming application cycle! It’s a tough process but all of you have what it takes to perform well! 🥳​

Love it, thank you very much @Chris Brown

 

[rapunzel]

Getting a bit nervous, I’m waiting to hear back from somewhere about the outcome of vacation scheme – whether I’m offered a training contract or not. They told us we would hear about a month and a half after the scheme at the latest. I haven’t heard anything yet, and it’s been a month.

For context, after the assessment centre they said they would let us know in about a month and they called me within two weeks. Should I be worried or does the TC decision making process just sometimes take a lot longer than AC to VS? I know they’ve only got a small recruitment team and run schemes in several cities and they gave everyone the same deadline for hearing back. Povs and experiences please?

I would say maybe give it some more time, it could be the case that feedback has taken longer time to be collected because of people going on holiday in the summer.

 

[trainee4u]

If you are interested in particular firms, I would recommend first applying to open days. They are not only great ways to learn more about a firm, but they also count as legal experience to include on applications and help you articulate your interest in that firm. I would also suggest completing forage courses for each firm where possible and attend virtual events. 🙂

Combining all these together will mean you can produce a super tailored, well-researched DTC and VS application. Speaking to future trainees either on LinkedIn or by arranging calls is also a great way of achieving this. Of course it’s not always possible to do things this way, but most of the time, it works. My application strategy is based on a post by @Andrei Radu (see below):
​

Great comments. Just wondering if you have any examples of how specific you got? I find it a bit tricky to know when I'm being superficial; for example, I might write that I have experience of Sharia finance and admire the firm for their leading practice, but I'm not sure if it's sufficiently specific. Similarly, there are some firms that don't necessarily hit the headlines very often, like Forsters, and I might write about Fearn v Tate (2023) for them, and it's obviously a landmark case but they're doing work every day and it's now 2025, but it's slightly difficult to tell whether writing about the deal mentioned in Legal 500 or Legal Cheek (so super obvious & easy to find really) that perhaps took place a couple of years ago is worth it, or you should go for something more recent.

Likewise I don't have a clue whether their partners are really hotshots - I mean Legal 500 says that so and so is band 2, but this all probably a bit superficial and based on slightly arbitrary criteria, whereas the firm itself presumably thinks that ALL their partners are super-cool, so maybe this sort of external validation isn't very useful.

 

[LawEnthus]

I would say maybe give it some more time, it could be the case that feedback has taken longer time to be collected because of people going on holiday in the summer.

Thank you rapunzel, your perspective helped me 🙏

 

[kunbia]

Random but I won a national family law essay competition earlier this year and was wondering if I should mention that in my applications? Just struggling to link it to commercial law 😭 I’m a non law student so I really was just trying everything last academic year.

 

[Jaysen]

Random but I won a national family law essay competition earlier this year and was wondering if I should mention that in my applications? Just struggling to link it to commercial law 😭 I’m a non law student so I really was just trying everything last academic year.

Definitely good to mention! It demonstrates the quality of your writing . No need to link it to commercial law, but you can focus on the skills you developed.

 

[Jaysen]

Following my previous post, where I discussed my experience last application cycle and where I applied, this post is about application strategy and interview preparation. I hope it helps those of you looking to apply to VS/DTC this cycle. I’d like to apologise in advance if this post ends up being incredibly long to read. I will begin with quoting my VS/DTC forum post for context:



1: how to select which firms to apply to:

The first thing I focused on was figuring out the things I wanted from a firm. There are so many different variables that must be considered as each and every firm is unique. However, in the context of city law firms, there are also several overlapping characteristics, which can help to determine the type of firm to apply to. For me, I looked at some of the following: 😅

a) academic requirements e.g., strong or high 2:1, AAA-ABB at A-level, strong GCSEs.
b) international nature of the firm - where does the firm have offices (e.g., Europe/Asia/USA)?
c) nature of work - multi-jurisdictional, cross-border transactions and disputes?
d) what clients does the firm have and do they instruct the firm regularly on mandates?
e) practice area strengths - corporate/disputes split focus, full-service vs specialist firm?
f) training contract structure (4 seats, 6 seats, non-rotational, compulsory seats, etc).
g) trainee intake size (larger intake of 50-100 or smaller intake of less than 25).
h) level of responsibility for trainees - hands on learning, leaner teams, larger teams etc.
i) trainee retention rates and firm culture - are trainees kept on as NQs and if so what %?
j) track to partnership - does the firm primarily hire laterally or promote internally?

Based on the above, I figured I was attracted to US/MC/SC firms more than national or regional law firms. However, with hindsight I would have applied to more US firms. There were so many firms I didn’t know existed e.g., Cleary Gottlieb, Debevoise & Plimpton, Gibson Dunn and Weil, Gotshal & Manges, up until I joined this forum, so ensure you do your research. 😂

As this process is hyper competitive, it’s super important to know which firms are best suited to your particular interests and skills. There is virtually no point in applying to firms like Paul, Weiss or Fried Frank if private equity isn’t your primary interest. Similarly, if you know a small trainee intake isn’t the best, applying to firms like Davis Polk or Orrick won’t be beneficial.

One thing I would stress the importance of is to not only aim for elite US/MC/SC firms. Some of these top city firms receive 3,000 applications each year for only 50-100 TCs. It’s better to try diversify applications and target other types of firms e.g., large city firms (SH, AG, CRS, HFW, TS, etc.). There is always the option to laterally move as an NQ to an elite firm. 🙂

I would also stress the importance of academic expectations. If a firm states it looks for a high 2:1 (68%) and AAA at A-level, it wouldn’t be a wise decision for someone to apply if they had a 2:2 and CCC. Applying for firms w/o minimum grade requirements is another strategic way of increasing chance of success. This is because they assess applications holistically. 😅

2: Applying criteria to firms (example):

Once you reach the point where you shortlist a specific number of firms that you want to apply to for WVS, SVS or DTC, the next thing to do is to apply this criteria to firms. There are some firms that will be more aligned to someone’s experiences, skills, interests, goals, academics, competencies, etc. Focus on these firms and not ones with less compatibility. 🙂

I will use Willkie Farr & Gallagher as an example to explain the above. I knew I was interested in M&A/PE, litigation/arbitration, competition and restructuring. Willkie had strengths in all of these areas. Further, Willkie is an international NY HQ US firm working on cross-border, multi-jurisdictional deals and disputes. The firm has a small trainee intake of 6-7 per year.

This means trainees at Willkie are given earlier and greater responsibility, learning on-the-job, working in leaner teams. Based on Legal Cheek data, Willkie retains around 80% of its trainees, suggesting most NQs qualify into the firm. The TC is split into 4 6 month seats with mandatory seats in PE M&A/Insurance M&A and litigation, investigations and enforcement.

Based on the criteria I had, Willkie ticked most of the boxes. This made it easier for me when it came to narrowing down my choices. In effect, I knew Willkie was a perfect firm for me, based on the things I was looking for in a firm. I used this process for every firm and narrowed down to around 20 firms. As the cycle progressed, I’d applied to 25 firms in total.

3: Implementing an application strategy:

This is probably the hardest part of applying to firms. Forming an application strategy that will guide you through making VS/DTC applications is quite challenging, especially if it’s someone’s first cycle. Some questions that might come up are ‘why is an application strategy important?’, ‘is this more a numbers game or should I focus on producing fewer, high quality applications?’

I didn’t prepare a proper application strategy at the beginning of the cycle. As a result, 7/7 of all WVS applications I submitted resulted in a PFO (sad times for me). It was at this point I realised that I need to change my approach. I decided I wanted to focus on open day applications over VS/DTC applications. I used what I learned and implemented them into my applications. 😀

If you are interested in particular firms, I would recommend first applying to open days. They are not only great ways to learn more about a firm, but they also count as legal experience to include on applications and help you articulate your interest in that firm. I would also suggest completing forage courses for each firm where possible and attend virtual events. 🙂

Combining all these together will mean you can produce a super tailored, well-researched DTC and VS application. Speaking to future trainees either on LinkedIn or by arranging calls is also a great way of achieving this. Of course it’s not always possible to do things this way, but most of the time, it works. My application strategy is based on a post by @Andrei Radu (see below):



4: interviews and assessment centres:

The second half of this post (unfortunately we are only half way through lmfao) is focused on interviews and ACs, something which I receive dozens of PMs about each week. Having done around a dozen interviews, I have discovered a specific set of tips that I believe are important to ensure maximum chance of success. I hope this helps you all in this next cycle. 🥲

The most important thing is to be specific and analytical. Talking too generally or vague about things will lead to weaker outcomes. I will refer to an example of a question I was asked in one of my interviews to illustrate this: ‘how do law firms generate revenue and profit?’ It might be tempting to simply answer, ‘billing clients’ or to ‘ensure lawyers have matters to work on’.

However, a stronger answer would discuss how a firm can identify new market opportunities by seeking international clients, explore fast-pace sectors e.g., tech, open new offices, develop a clear relationship between offices, etc. Another aspect would be internal department work. If a firm is advising on a transaction = competition, finance and tax work from same client. 😀

I have quoted some of the posts I used, which helped me understand how to best prepare for competency, motivational, commercial and SJT style interviews. The best advice is don’t strive for perfection. It’s inevitable that you will make mistakes in this process. The key is to maintain confidence and clarity in the way you speak to the interviewers on the day. 🙂
​

5: Interviews and assessment centres (II):

Another question I was often asked about was a mixture between motivation and commercial awareness: ‘why this firm’, ‘who are our main competitors’, ‘what distinguishes our firm from our competitors’, etc. I would often focus on a few things to curate my answers. Knowing how the city operates and each firms USPs is a key starting point, but other things to consider are:

1) a firm’s core practice areas and specialisms.
2) the Chambers and Legal 500 rankings of the practice areas in question.
3) firms that rank in the same tier (Band 1/2).
4) position in the City of London: is it a big city or elite US/MC/SC law firm?
5) what clients regularly instruct a firm and the industry or sector they belong to.

As part of my preparation, I would research the firms using above criteria to identify their main competitors. For example, Paul, Weiss is strong in private equity, comparable to other law firms such as Kirkland, Latham and Weil. Akin is very strong in restructuring, comparable to Weil and Milbank. Covington is strong in life sciences, as is Cooley and Ropes & Gray. 🙂

When I started writing applications for Spring / Summer VS’, I didn’t know much about private equity, debt/equity finance or capital markets, so struggled with preparation. Understanding a firm’s market position and focus will help with preparation for wider questions about why that firm and who their competitors are. Below are examples for Paul, Weiss and Willkie: 🙂







I hope this post (despite its insane length) will help you guys to create application strategies, prepare for interviews and eventually securing several VS and DTC ACs. I used this approach this past cycle and it enabled me to succeed. I wish you all the best of luck with the upcoming application cycle! It’s a tough process but all of you have what it takes to perform well! 🥳​

This is amazing.

 

[Jaysen]

Getting a bit nervous, I’m waiting to hear back from somewhere about the outcome of vacation scheme – whether I’m offered a training contract or not. They told us we would hear about a month and a half after the scheme at the latest. I haven’t heard anything yet, and it’s been a month.

For context, after the assessment centre they said they would let us know in about a month and they called me within two weeks. Should I be worried or does the TC decision making process just sometimes take a lot longer than AC to VS? I know they’ve only got a small recruitment team and run schemes in several cities and they gave everyone the same deadline for hearing back. Povs and experiences please?

Definitely not a reflection on your chances. Graduate recruitment teams are usually a bit tight around this time of year (summer holidays, small number of staff, waiting on people to make decisions etc.). No news at this stage is not bad news

 

[Chris Brown]

Great comments. Just wondering if you have any examples of how specific you got? I find it a bit tricky to know when I'm being superficial; for example, I might write that I have experience of Sharia finance and admire the firm for their leading practice, but I'm not sure if it's sufficiently specific. Similarly, there are some firms that don't necessarily hit the headlines very often, like Forsters, and I might write about Fearn v Tate (2023) for them, and it's obviously a landmark case but they're doing work every day and it's now 2025, but it's slightly difficult to tell whether writing about the deal mentioned in Legal 500 or Legal Cheek (so super obvious & easy to find really) that perhaps took place a couple of years ago is worth it, or you should go for something more recent.

Likewise I don't have a clue whether their partners are really hotshots - I mean Legal 500 says that so and so is band 2, but this all probably a bit superficial and based on slightly arbitrary criteria, whereas the firm itself presumably thinks that ALL their partners are super-cool, so maybe this sort of external validation isn't very useful.

It might be better to highlight what makes that particular firms’ sharia finance practice leading when compared to other firms that also offer it as a service. For example, is there a partner at that firm who has a stellar reputation? Did the firm advise on a big mandate that solidified its status as a leading sharia finance firm? Is that firm ranked band 1 for that practice? Does that firm have a portfolio of sharia finance clients to demonstrate that it has a ‘leading practice?’

Drawing on your experience in sharia finance to explain why you are so interested in it and at that particular firm is also important. Have you worked on matters that are similar to what that firm works on? Have you developed skills and competencies that would be beneficial to that firm and its clients? How has your experience informed your genuine interest in pursuing that area of law further? Asking yourself these kind of things helps with application drafting. 👌🏾

It’s not ideal to write about deals and disputes that are several years old, especially because the firm will have worked on many other things since then that you can write about. Generally, I would recommend applying to firms where it’s easier to write about their work, whether it’s hit the headlines or simply because there is plenty of information available online about it. I would think Chambers and Legal 500 rankings depict an accurate overview of the firms’ strengths. 😀

I don’t think there is an issue with writing about a deal or dispute that can be found in Legal Cheek or another publication. If anything, that shows you are looking beyond the firm website and incorporating research into answers. I’d try avoiding repeating what the firm already knows about it though. There has to be a purpose for writing about a particular matter. Fearn v Tate is a landmark tort case so it should be fine. 🤷🏾‍♂️​

 

[billyonthespeeddial]

One thing I would stress the importance of is to not only aim for elite US/MC/SC firms. ... It’s better to try diversify applications and target other types of firms e.g., large city firms (SH, AG, CRS, HFW, TS, etc.).

Travers Smith finding out it's not Silver Circle anymore