On the topic of application questions, is there generally a difference between VI questions and application form questions in terms of what you could be asked and how to answer it?
I have collected my application form questions, which tend to be 250-300 words, and have answers to everything I've ever been asked (some answered probably better than others!).
Then in a VI I think there's likely to be one or two firm-specific questions, such as "why do you want to work for Sue, Grabbit, & Run LLP" and "which of our practice areas interests you most, and why", as well as some generic questions such as "how do you cope under pressure?". I think sometimes they might make these questions two-part, presumably to make it more difficult.
However, I just wonder whether you can literally read out your set of application form questions (having perhaps rehearsed and recorded them before hand, as well as preparing one or two scripts for firm-specific questions).
I was just watching a couple of "life as a trainee" video, and the first one appeared to be reading from a script in answer to prepared questions, and it came across clearly and the video was also exactly 5:00, which suggests good time management. The second was a couple of minutes longer and did not appear to have been scripted and was harder to follow due to hesitations etc.
My takeaway is that trainee 1 has put more effort in, by carefully writing the words, and especially as this is selling a law firm, this is the ideal approach.
Trainee 1 might have recorded several times and clearly was given the questions in advance, which is not the case on a VI. However, I'm just wondering whether I can attempt to follow a similar approach to improve my VI answers.
To my understanding, the general expectation in a VI is to expand on written application answers and not to simply memorise and regurgitate what is already written (the person who read the application is most likely the person reviewing the VI so they can identify this quickly). I also don’t think it’s ideal to rehearse scripted answers to questions that you think may come up. I think this would most likely lead someone to try answer questions that aren’t even being asked by shoehorning in prepared answers. VI are generally very short (30-60 seconds prep and 60-90 seconds to answer), so I think it’s important to keep answers clear and concise. Good time management is of course very important. 😅
In my experience with Willkie, it seemed it was okay to make the same initial point, but the reasoning that followed had to be different. For example, if I had wrote in my application that I was interested in private equity for reasons ABC, in the VI, I could similarly state I was interested in private equity, but for reasons XYZ. I don’t think firms would expect fundamental motivations to change between an application and VI, but they might expect to see more research into their firm within that time period, which means VI answers need to be more specific and developed. I think if the fundamental motivations changed, that would probably be seen as a red flag. I think natural pauses and hesitations are normal tbh. 🙂
In my experience with Willkie, it seemed it was okay to make the same initial point, but the reasoning that followed had to be different. For example, if I had wrote in my application that I was interested in private equity for reasons ABC, in the VI, I could similarly state I was interested in private equity, but for reasons XYZ. I don’t think firms would expect fundamental motivations to change between an application and VI, but they might expect to see more research into their firm within that time period, which means VI answers need to be more specific and developed. I think if the fundamental motivations changed, that would probably be seen as a red flag. I think natural pauses and hesitations are normal tbh. 🙂
Last edited: