When answering “What are you looking for from your Training Contract?” I think the strongest responses blend both - starting with what you are genuinely looking for in a training contract generally and then naturally connecting that to why the specific firm fits what you are looking for so well. This shows that you have clear independent reasoning behind your goals, rather than tailoring your answer only because you are applying to that firm.
For example, you might say you are looking for structured, high-quality training, exposure to complex cross-border work, and the chance to work closely with industry-leading clients because you are someone who learns best by being fully immersed in challenging environments. That is your independent reasoning, which is quite generic in itself. Then, you strengthen your answer by explaining how the specific firm aligns with that. For instance, the firm’s small intake, or guaranteed client secondments directly supports your development goals. You could say something like, “This is exactly why I was drawn to [Firm Name] - the smaller intake means greater exposure to deals and responsibility early on, and the guaranteed international secondment reflects the global scope of the work I want to experience.” If you can also give an example of how you thrived in a similar environment, your answer will be elevated.
Framing it this way does two things. First, it shows you have reflected carefully on what you need to grow as a future lawyer. Second, it proves you have researched the firm well enough to see how their strategy, structure, and culture align with your own ambitions. That level of clarity and alignment will always make your answer stand out more.
I’m sure
@Jessica Booker will have more thoughts on this.