Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Law Firm Directory
Apply to Paul, Weiss
Forums
Law Firm Events
Law Firm Deadlines
TCLA TV
Members
Leaderboards
Premium Database
Premium Chat
Commercial Awareness
Future Trainee Advice
🚨 Reed Smith has just announced its Direct Training Contract route!
The deadline is
20th June
.
👉
Read Becca's announcement post here
📝
Apply directly here
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
Applications Discussion
Why this firm?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="rn7" data-source="post: 11719" data-attributes="member: 2026"><p>I've had some trouble with researching firms due to a number of reasons.</p><p></p><p>When I look at firms of interest, the first thing I look for personally is their practice strengths relative to their competitors. This is because I have an (admittedly faint) idea for what type of practice I might be most interested in, so I target firms of at least some renown in that area.</p><p>The issue that follows is that I feel full-service firms (like CMS) don't really have a particular specialism, and it is harder to showcase the motivation to join that firm because of X and Y practices <u>in particular</u>.</p><p></p><p>Following on from this, some firms do not display representative experience (e.g. Taylor Wessing). This makes it hard to know what kind of work is carried out within the departments, and what parts of a sector they service. I've resorted to alternative means of researching the clients a firm works with (like Legal 500), but they are rather limited.</p><p></p><p>Finally, some firms' strategies internationally and locally remain indiscernible, despite research. DLA Piper for example - I see no ambitious future plans or recent milestones. DLA appears to be perennially-strong in the mid-market across the board. They have one of the largest office networks worldwide, having grown it slowly since the 2005 tie-up... and... that's it? No recent groundbreaking mergers, like BCLP's fully-integrated merger, or A&O's and CMS' ideas for US tie-ups... Seems like it's committed to slow growth and consolidation. Not much exciting stuff talk about. If I'm missing anything, do enlighten me.</p><p></p><p>P.S: Sorry to revive an old thread, just thought these are uncertainties others might share or want to discuss.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="rn7, post: 11719, member: 2026"] I've had some trouble with researching firms due to a number of reasons. When I look at firms of interest, the first thing I look for personally is their practice strengths relative to their competitors. This is because I have an (admittedly faint) idea for what type of practice I might be most interested in, so I target firms of at least some renown in that area. The issue that follows is that I feel full-service firms (like CMS) don't really have a particular specialism, and it is harder to showcase the motivation to join that firm because of X and Y practices [U]in particular[/U]. Following on from this, some firms do not display representative experience (e.g. Taylor Wessing). This makes it hard to know what kind of work is carried out within the departments, and what parts of a sector they service. I've resorted to alternative means of researching the clients a firm works with (like Legal 500), but they are rather limited. Finally, some firms' strategies internationally and locally remain indiscernible, despite research. DLA Piper for example - I see no ambitious future plans or recent milestones. DLA appears to be perennially-strong in the mid-market across the board. They have one of the largest office networks worldwide, having grown it slowly since the 2005 tie-up... and... that's it? No recent groundbreaking mergers, like BCLP's fully-integrated merger, or A&O's and CMS' ideas for US tie-ups... Seems like it's committed to slow growth and consolidation. Not much exciting stuff talk about. If I'm missing anything, do enlighten me. P.S: Sorry to revive an old thread, just thought these are uncertainties others might share or want to discuss. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?
Post reply
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
Applications Discussion
Why this firm?
Top
Bottom
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…