Hearing Back from Law Firms, Assessment Centres & Interview Tips - 2019 - 2020

[Legal_rawn]

Hi guys, I am currently writing a piece regarding the WG tests and would value your opinions.

Love them or loathe them they have increased in popularity with firms like Linklaters and DLA now deploying them as the sole barrier standing between a PFO and a place at their AC.

My personal view is that these tests are completely useless, I just fail to see how your intelligence is being tested as your competition may have an unfair advantage.

1) Many people get help from friends/family as its so easy to do so - the only thing stopping someone is the fear of repeating it at the AC (barely any firms do this)

2) You can now pay people to sit them for you and pay X amount to get into Y decile

3) You can purchase practice tests and answers - Again the law firms will be non the wiser.

4) These tests can be passed with a bit of luck. I did a practice test once (10 questions) simulated them and clicked one of the answers at random and got 8/10. Surely this does not make me more "smart" than the other person who got 4/10 but actually did it properly?

I would love to hear the views of applicants and what they think of the WG assessment. Its quite strange as S&M are seen as the toughest firm to obtain a TC/VS at as they are hugely focused on intelligence (high grades etc) but are also the only MC to not use the WG or any psychometric test.

I prefer massively when firms use some sort of test. I like these tests and actually tend to do quite well in them (if I do say so myself ) and they definitely boost my application. I think they are used to show a range of skills, coming from a non-law background I have many skills which are best shown through these tests like the Pwc one. For me I find them better than writing an application, I understand that some people hate them but I think there needs to be recognition that they do allow a wider range of people to show their strengths.

 

[Pallatablelawyer]

what research? I haven’t seen anything that suggests that so would be interested to see it

Actually, that was a wrong statement & idek how i posted that. I was initially going to say that but the research I heard about spoke about psychometric testing and not those games. However those games kinda count as that.

 

[Pallatablelawyer]

Excerpt from a research parliamentary paper “ In both cases, the difference in average scores between ethnic minority and white groups meant that the tests had the potential to be unfair.“

 

[Jessica Booker]

I had an AC two weeks back for a training contract with four other people at the assessment centre. I've remained in touch with two of them, with one receiving a rejection last Tuesday and the other on Thursday. I called up graduate rec to enquire about my status and they just said that it's still under review.
Anyone with an idea about what's happening?

you are still being considered and they haven’t made a decision yet.

 

[S30]

You wont hear back from Ashurst just yet. Probably until later on in Feb or March for a direct TC

Perfect, thanks for letting me know!

 

[Jessica Booker]

Actually, that was a wrong statement & idek how i posted that. I was initially going to say that but the research I heard about spoke about psychometric testing and not those games. However those games kinda count as that.

Games based assessments do not "kinda" count as that. They are very different assessments designed in very different ways.

For clarity on this, some ability tests there is known potential adverse impact (verbal reasoning, WG, numerical reasoning, abstract reasoning) - but this is not seen in games based assessments.

Basically, there is a best practice rule called the 4/5th rule which monitors adverse impact. With ability tests, like the ones mentioned above, there is evidence to show there can be adverse impact IF you set a very high percentile benchmark (ie the 4/5th rule is not met). This is typically against women for abstract and numerical reasoning, and against BAME applicants in verbal reasoning and assessments like the WG.

However, firms are acutely aware of this and part of the reason their percentile benchmarks are probably much lower than you expect is to minimise or eliminate adverse impact.

I literally could bore the hind legs off a donkey about these type of assessments. Happy to explain further if people want though....

 

[Ayo Babatunde]

Rejection from Clyde & Co Post AC

 

[Jessica Booker]

I prefer massively when firms use some sort of test. I like these tests and actually tend to do quite well in them (if I do say so myself ) and they definitely boost my application. I think they are used to show a range of skills, coming from a non-law background I have many skills which are best shown through these tests like the Pwc one. For me I find them better than writing an application, I understand that some people hate them but I think there needs to be recognition that they do allow a wider range of people to show their strengths.

They also provide a much more consistent and objective assessment. Rather than having to assess someone's previous experience (which is known to have huge flaws and show little to no correlation to being able to do the job) it will assess the candidate's ability in a core and necessary skill deemed necessary.

People may hate these forms of assessment, but I can tell you now that they are a much fairer system than application forms/CVs/interviews.

If used correctly and appropriately, they also are one of the strongest predictors of performance later in the recruitment process and also on the job...

 

[Miki3999]

Just got an email from Dentons saying they dont review their direct TC apps until later on in the year...

Thanks because I am yet to apply

 

[ComplianceChange]

Hate to say it, but it actually might be the most inclusive assessment out there

You may think that but when a firm [specifically] PwC has nothing to go on aside from the game score it is not fair, especially when someone is severely dyslexic and they don't take that into account. I have no issue with WG- they at least have more meaning.

Suppose we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

[ComplianceChange]

Hi guys, I am currently writing a piece regarding the WG tests and would value your opinions.

Love them or loathe them they have increased in popularity with firms like Linklaters and DLA now deploying them as the sole barrier standing between a PFO and a place at their AC.

My personal view is that these tests are completely useless, I just fail to see how your intelligence is being tested as your competition may have an unfair advantage.

1) Many people get help from friends/family as its so easy to do so - the only thing stopping someone is the fear of repeating it at the AC (barely any firms do this)

2) You can now pay people to sit them for you and pay X amount to get into Y decile

3) You can purchase practice tests and answers - Again the law firms will be non the wiser.

4) These tests can be passed with a bit of luck. I did a practice test once (10 questions) simulated them and clicked one of the answers at random and got 8/10. Surely this does not make me more "smart" than the other person who got 4/10 but actually did it properly?

I would love to hear the views of applicants and what they think of the WG assessment. Its quite strange as S&M are seen as the toughest firm to obtain a TC/VS at as they are hugely focused on intelligence (high grades etc) but are also the only MC to not use the WG or any psychometric test.

I absolutely hate the game-based assessments, I mean specifically the silly arctic shores ones or the ones that Ashurst use.

I don't mind the WG really but I haven't really applied to firms aside from CMS that require it, and therefore haven't really done much of it.

 

[Jessica Booker]

You may think that but when a firm [specifically] PwC has nothing to go on aside from the game score it is not fair, especially when someone is severely dyslexic and they don't take that into account. I have no issue with WG- they at least have more meaning.

Suppose we will just have to agree to disagree.

Its not something I think, its something I know.

Anyone who is dyslexic should be requesting reasonable adjustments and not completing the assessment full stop. But employers will know this.

 

[W]

They also provide a much more consistent and objective assessment. Rather than having to assess someone's previous experience (which is known to have huge flaws and show little to no correlation to being able to do the job) it will assess the candidate's ability in a core and necessary skill deemed necessary.

People may hate these forms of assessment, but I can tell you now that they are a much fairer system than application forms/CVs/interviews.

If used correctly and appropriately, they also are one of the strongest predictors of performance later in the recruitment process and also on the job...

Are you referring to tests in general or WG?

 

[Jessica Booker]

Are you referring to tests in general or WG?

Both (well general ability tests anyway)

 

[TashaC]

Have you accepted the offer?

Yes, because it was last year and I only had 4 weeks to respond.

 

[W]

Both

Okay, what’s your thoughts on top tier law firms that don’t do tests then? I think firms such as these still recruit future successful lawyers as well as maintaining them, no? (btw just playing devils advocate lol)

 

[DavidJC]

WG has been around for a long time. I was sending out paper copies of the WG in 2005! I don’t think they are more popular now than they were then. If anything many firms have replaced the WG with other forms of assessment (video interviews/gamification based assessments).

No one is using them a a sole barrier though. Not sure where you got this perception from.

Firms often retest WG at assessment centre (along with verbal reasoning and other ability tests). The retest assessed whether you took the original test or not. I have not offered people in the past where the re-test didn’t match. It’s more common than you think for firms to retest.

As it isn’t a sole assessment, it’s likely that most people who falsely take the test will be rejected anyway.

Firms are well aware of practice tests and answers. Does not mean they are the questions you will get on the individual assessment you will get, as each candidate’s assessment comes from a bank of questions. If I took the same firm’s assessment as you, we’d receive different questions.

No paid for services can guarantee what percentile ranking you will get. Don’t fall for that marketing BS. Percentile ranking processes won’t be the same.

Practice tests are not a true indicator of the real assessment. They are assessed in very different ways - getting 8/10 in a practice test could mean a poor percentile ranking, while getting 4/10 on a practice test could actually be a higher percentile ranking (depending on weighting of questions/whether you get negative scores).

happy to discuss this more generally for your article, if that helps?

How much room for deviation between the online tests and AC tests would you say there is? I'm asking this in case some candidates change their minds about their responses to some of the same questions.

 

[Jessica Booker]

Okay, what’s your thoughts on top tier law firms that don’t do tests then? I think firms such as these still recruit future successful lawyers as well as maintaining them, no? (btw just playing devils advocate lol)

That's up to them. There is no perfect magic recruitment bullet unfortunately. Firms who don't use them and recruit successfully are doing so with other forms of risk/bias, and will have to mitigate that risk/bias accordingly. That will probably include putting more time/effort into the selection process, or having later assessments that assess the same type of skills that the ability test would. For instance, if you have a written assessment or case study at assessment centre, this is likely to assess the same type of skills or competencies as a verbal reasoning test or WG (and why some firms use both the early assessment and an AC assessment as one is more likely to verify the other).

 

[Jessica Booker]

How much room for deviation between the online tests and AC tests would you say there is? I'm asking this in case some candidates change their minds about their responses to some of the same questions.

They are completely different questions posed.

 

[Jessica Booker]

Yes, because it was last year and I only had 4 weeks to respond.

Then you haven't been offered a TC, you have accepted a TC (technically).

In this case, it is a massive double edge sword. Personally I wouldn't highlight it unless explicitly asked.