Vacation Scheme Interview & Assessment

Today I was in London for an interview & assessment for a vacation scheme with a major city law firm.

By the way, 'today' is Monday; not Saturday as my blog actually suggests. I am having some problems with the date & time settings on my blog.

As is typically involved with such things there were various parts to the selection procedure - I had an interview; gave a pre-prepared presentation; sat a verbal reasoning test and took part in a group exercise with 7 other candidates.

Having undertaken similar forms of assessment in the past, I felt that I was better prepared to perform well on the day. Its amazing though how once you get into an interview or assessment situation that you forget about all the things that had calmed you down previously. Rather than being calmed and relaxed, I felt rushed.

The presentation that I delivered was not done so well unfortunately. I fear that I came across as being unclear and confused at times. The points that I was making did answer the questions I was set quite well at least that is the impression I got from the interviewer. There were a couple of times when I had to provide additional examples and explain things further because they were unclear. I felt though that I was able to think well on my feet. So, no problem there.

The problem with my presentation was in its organisation and the fact that it exceeded the allocated time. I didn't immediately begin by getting to the question and answering it. Instead, I set the scene for too long and this was easy to detect because I didn't say any of the key words in the questions until about 60% of the way through the presentation. All this was a direct result of having only finished preparing the presentation in the morning though.

Nothing much to say about the verbal reasoning test. I had sat similar tests in the past and had done pretty well on them. Hopefully the same was the case this time.

I very much enjoyed the the company of the other candidates. They were all talented individuals: interesting, experienced and a pleasure to speak to. They were also high-achievers in the courses they were studying on. There was less of the: 'Oh, yeah, I am behind with my dissertation too - its such a drag, isn't it?' and more of the 'I'm not too pleased with my 65% in Company Law; its out of place with respect to my results; Contract Law, for instance, I got 77% and won the academic prize for the highest-scorer in my year'.

The group exercise was solely based on a commercial issue with no legal analysis required. We performed really bad as a group though. We didn't approach our task in an organised manner and our conclusions were questionable. Fundamentally though, we didn't work well as a group which was what was being tested. We didn't try to listen to each other and compromise; instead, we enjoyed opportunities to pick holes in each other's ideas.

Still, in all it was a thoroughly enjoyable experience. Speaking to current trainees at the firm afterwards helped confirms some of the things that I do and don't like about the nature of their work. The trainees seemed to enjoy the fact that they were able to drag themselves through their law degrees (mostly at top-10 universities) and found comfort in the fact that they didn't have to employ their legal knowledge as part of their work. Instead, because of the client-centred approach (which they seem to make far too much of a deal about) they can hide what they don't know about the law (a direct result of never having to maintain it after studying law through trips to the law library) with the defence that they don't want to use too much legal jargon so that the client doesn't understand them.

I'd really relish the opportunity to have to research difficult areas of the law and understand them before I could discharge the obligations due to whomever. If I have gotten things wrong as part of my work - I'd like to know that I was the one who made the slip-up so that I could take responsibility and learn for the future. I get the feeling that in working on large commercial transactions as part of a huge team (and often around the globe) there is very little that you can say you contributed by yourself. As a result, solicitors, I feel, don't get that feeling of satisfaction of having achieved something substantive.

Accordingly, the day was useful in giving me food-for-thought as regards my future career. I do not feel that I would be comfortable working at the firm that I was assessed at and like I say, I think that for many reasons.

Afterwards on my journey back home, I was thinking about how to approach my Trusts law revision. Its actually something I have been thinking about for a while now. The problem that I am having is that I literally do not know where to start! Its not that I don't understand particular parts; I am just trying to find a nice area to begin my revision. I have looked at past exam papers - especially last year's - and I feel that I could tackle them with equal success. Of course, revision is about raising my knowledge and thoughtfulness; but that still doesn't answer my question! After much though, I have decided though that I am going to start half-way through the syllabus as that is an area that I feel least comfortable with - the 'Beneficiary principle' and non-charitable purpose trusts it is then!