Paul, Weiss is live in the forum now

Graduate Recruitment and three associates from Paul, Weiss are live in the forum to chat with you.

Join the live thread →

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Andrei Radu" data-source="post: 217716" data-attributes="member: 36777">Hi [USER=34873]@AS24[/USER] that's a great question I used to also wonder about, and it also gives the opportunity to clear a common misconception. While you may very roughly think of band 1 to band 4 Chambers rankings as going from the "best" to the "worst" in reputation, this best-to-worst ranking is only a ranking of a select handful of firms which are already considered to be the best in the jurisdiction for that type if work. To take high-end Corporate M&A as an example: there are around 20 firms in total Chambers ranks here from band 1 to band 2. Nonetheless, there are more than 100 firms in the City that will provide corporate M&A advice and that would love to make it to the ratings. While a band 1 corporate M&A firm (say, Freshfields) can normally be assumed to have a stronger reputation in M&A than a band 4 firm (say, White & Case), White & Case can still be assumed to have a much stronger reputation in M&A than the significant majority of firms who do not even make it to the rankings - which in this case includes many big names, such as Gibson Dunn, Travers Smith, BCLP, Milbank, etc. Generally speaking, if a firm's practice gets a Chambers ranking, it is good enough to be mentioned as a reason to want to join the firm (although, to differentiate it from similarly/better ranked rivals, you may not want to have it as the only reason you list). A second point that should be made is that Chambers rankings are not an indicator of absolute quality, in that they are influenced by two factors:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The size of the firm's practice: Chambers rankings do not only assess for the quality of a firm's work - ie are their usual mandates consistently high-end and complex ones, does it have blue-chip clients etc - but also the quantity, as this is also a factor for establishing reputation. As such, larger and older firms, such as the Magic Circle, will generally have an advantage over newer firms. Thus, if you are principally interested in quality of work rather than general renown, you can motivate choosing a lower band-ranked firm because of factors such as: (i) a high average deal/case value; (ii) having a high proportion of highly-ranked practitioners; (iii) punching above their weight by getting a Chambers ranking despite lower headcount; etc. All of these are examples of factors that could be indicative of a high-quality practice, despite not being as renowned as the practice of the largest players in the market.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">A high level of generality: Importantly, the Chambers rankings operate at a high level of generality, while you could tie your interests to more specific subareas. Thus, while a firm may be ranked "just" band 4, there are likely particular subareas (say life sciences M&A, or tech M&A) where they have stronger expertise than in other areas, and potentially even market leading expertise. For instance, White & Case, a band-4 ranked firm for corporate M&A, is generally thought to be among the best firms for infrastructure/energy-liked M&A work. </li> </ol></blockquote>

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

Top Bottom

Search

Search

Reply to thread