Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Andrei Radu" data-source="post: 188304" data-attributes="member: 36777">Hi [USER=28496]@bella98[/USER] the question uses slightly ambiguous phrasing but I think you are going for the right approach. Having taken a quick look across Hill Dickinson's website, I think it's clear you have to choose only one of the three broad groups for your TC. However, then you get to choose between a number of different seats offered by each group. The way I see it, the question can be interpreted in two ways depending on what is meant by the term 'teams':<ol>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Which practice area in which group are you most attracted to? </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Which of our groups are you most attracted to?</li>
</ol>Your approach seems to track the first formulation. Intuitively, I think this first interpretation is likely the right one, since if the second interpretation was right using the word 'seat' would be completely superfluous. However, I would also look at this from a upside/downside risk perspective. If all the firm wants you to do is explain your motivation for one of the groups, and you also explain your motivations for a practice area within a group, it should not hurt your chances too much. If anything, the more specific interest in a practice area can support a point about your more general interest in the group. If however the firm does want you to discuss a practice area interest as well and you only discuss your interest in one of the groups, you will have missed out on one of the key points of the question.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Andrei Radu, post: 188304, member: 36777"] Hi [USER=28496]@bella98[/USER] the question uses slightly ambiguous phrasing but I think you are going for the right approach. Having taken a quick look across Hill Dickinson's website, I think it's clear you have to choose only one of the three broad groups for your TC. However, then you get to choose between a number of different seats offered by each group. The way I see it, the question can be interpreted in two ways depending on what is meant by the term 'teams': [LIST=1] [*]Which practice area in which group are you most attracted to? [*]Which of our groups are you most attracted to? [/LIST] Your approach seems to track the first formulation. Intuitively, I think this first interpretation is likely the right one, since if the second interpretation was right using the word 'seat' would be completely superfluous. However, I would also look at this from a upside/downside risk perspective. If all the firm wants you to do is explain your motivation for one of the groups, and you also explain your motivations for a practice area within a group, it should not hurt your chances too much. If anything, the more specific interest in a practice area can support a point about your more general interest in the group. If however the firm does want you to discuss a practice area interest as well and you only discuss your interest in one of the groups, you will have missed out on one of the key points of the question. [/QUOTE]

Verification

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

Search

Search

Reply to thread