Hi,
For
Sidley Austin's work experience section, it only allows a maximum of four work experiences to be filled. I wonder if it’s better to list all four legal work experiences, or is it more recommended to fill in the four most recent or substantial work experiences?
In most cases, it is best to prioritise your four most relevant and substantial legal experiences, rather than simply the four most recent roles. This means selecting experiences that best demonstrate:
exposure to high-quality legal work;
responsibility, analytical skills, or client interaction; and
alignment with Sidley’s practice areas or international profile.
If your most recent roles are also your strongest, then recency and relevance will naturally coincide. However, if an older role was materially more substantive or better evidences your suitability for Sidley, it is entirely appropriate to include it instead of a more recent but lighter-touch experience.
I'd also add one non-legal experience if it was particularly interesting or carries several transferable skills.
In short: quality, relevance, and impact should guide your selection, not chronology alone.
Hope this helps!