Im a future trainee at A&O so I’ll try and explain :
The first part of the interview is the case study. they effectively bombard you with a book of material and you’ve got to synthesise that info and then present back to a Partner for about 10 mins and then you take 45-50 mins of questions.
top tip- spend around just over 1/2 of the time given to look at the material and take it all in, and then the remainder preparing to present. It is so so so crucial that even if you don’t understand what material is put in front of you, that you demonstrate that you can consider small issues, commercially. So thinking about potential positives/challenges for the firm and for clients and then think about scale too- long term and short term.
Structure is also really important. with the nature of this exercise being quite intense, people will just present back without really thinking about structure. So if you’re able to organise your findings into a logical thought pattern, you’re already ahead. The questioning is to find out the extent to which you understood the material and again checking whether you’re able to relate things to the firm and commercial issues. It is very important that you relate everything you say back to both the firm and the client and logically explain why certain issues may have different outcomes dependant upon varying situations. That way you’re demonstrating a flexible mindset- a key characteristic. You’ll be pushed. A lot. But what they’re also looking for is composure, that you can keep calm under pressure.
Re scenario-based interview- so unique to this firm compared to many City firms, A&O do a scenario based interview instead of one on competencies. This is because they get that not everyone has opportunities to dabble in legal and non-legal work experience and so for some people it can be difficult to fully come up with competencies. On top of that, you can revise for a competency interview; they want to see your genuine thinking pattern. Approach this exercise with logic. Do not not not overthink it. What they find is that people tend to over complicate things to demonstrate they know what work a lawyer does but that goes against them. I’d say the best way to prep for this is to think back to your SJT, and the “most likely” options given when you do it. Use management or recruiting companies resources online to practice- its a common interview type for consulting companies. So an example could be “you’re working on a deal and you’ve got a deadline tomorrow evening and the bank hasn’t signed some key documents. It is now the afternoon. It is crucial that the documents are signed. What would you do”. So in this scenario you’d explain you’d check with colleagues first to see if they knew anything about when the bank tends to respond e.g its known that JP usually get back to emails approx 4pm. Then you’d call the bank- explain why that’s more effective than emailing. Then you’d talk about how you’d go about talking to them- firm, persistent but not annoying. Arrange a follow up.
Etc etc etc , it’s about being logical and explaining reasons for that logic.
My AC felt like a car crash but it was the only AC I did where i actually came out of it happy knowing that I’d learnt something purely out of the nature of the exercises.
This is a lot of detail, but it’s nothing more than what TCLA have on their interview experiences or what a quick google / meaningful chat at an open day would tell you. All the questions are different as it depends on who your Partner is and what you have in your presentation so I’d say preparing not knowing what Qs you’re going to receive would be a good bet as it would probably allow you to answer more holistically and in line with the case study context.
