I am an Associate at a Global Law Firm. Ask me Anything!

[Jaysen]

hey does anyone have any tips on answering this question?
How do you feel about knowing the majority of your work will make rich people richer

Hey - it would be best to create a thread for this question, rather than posting this here.

 

[VLV]

Hi All,

My name is LM and I am a Corporate Associate at a global law firm. I am pleased to announce that I have joined the TCLA forum team. I have just commenced a sabbatical to pursue further study and wanted to take this opportunity to share my experiences so far in the industry.

I applied to several firms in 2016 while undertaking the GDL as a non-law student. Following successful vacation schemes across multiple firms, I commenced my training contract in 2017. During my training contract, I was fortunate enough to undertake an international secondment to the US and a client secondment. In 2018, I accepted a position as an Associate in the Firm's Corporate department.

Please use this thread to ask me any questions relating to training contracts, secondments, the role of a Trainee or the role of an Associate.

Thank you all for reading and I look forward to answering any questions you may have.

Best,
LM

Hi LM,

I am a corporate solicitor (2 yrs PQE soon) with a focus on M&A work, I trained and qualified at a regional firm. I am eager to move to London and work in the corporate department of a top firm. However, many of the vacancies I want to apply for require that the applicant trained at a City firm.

I am looking for some insight into what was expected of you as an associate so I can compare the skills and experience I have to that level of expectation. For instance, I am aware that firms expect their juniors to be commercially aware, but could you give me an example of a situation where you would be expected to apply such knowledge? As another example, when I attended a ULaw PSC course in London the teacher seemed to suggest that she would expect trainees (in her previous role) to be able to calculate and comment on a company's financial leverage ratios after reviewing their accounts in anticipation of a kick-off meeting. This is beyond what would be expected from a trainee at my firm but it would be helpful to know if this is the standard at your firm? What would be the expectations of a corporate junior in a client meeting? If I draft a lengthy email or prepare a shareholders' agreement, I would take time editing it - were you in an environment where there was an expectation to get the drafting right the first time, particularly in terms of efficiency?

You mentioned in a previous post points about thinking on your feet and trusting that someone can carry out good quality work - are you able to add context to this? Is good quality work something that is correct and produced in a timely manner or does it go the extra mile to add value for the client in some way? I ask because I sometimes overlook what I am already achieving when I do not know where the benchmark is.

I understand working in London would involve longer hours; greater volume of work; tighter deadlines; larger teams; more demanding clients and deal values are much higher, but I am looking for more specific insight into what is expected in terms of knowledge and experience. What was your role in respect of transactions, for example?

In my current position, I work directly for partners who worked at international City firms for a substantial period. I am:

- regularly the first point of contact to clients (CEOs/ owners of mostly private /family-owned businesses);
- responsible for aspects of transactions (disclosure, ancillary docs, organising signing/closing) usually valued at up to £20m;
- project managing transactions; and
- responsible for leading smaller deals, including negotiating key documents with the other side.

In general, what I would like to be able to assess is whether I meet the knowledge / experience criteria of my City counter-part and work to fill any potential gaps where I do not.

Finally, thank you for starting this thread - I find that there is much less information available concerning career progression once you qualify unless you have the benefit of a mentor.

Thank you for your time.

V

 

[LM]

Hi @LM

Thank you so much for sharing your insights.

I am currently a trainee in my third seat and wondered if you had any advice on the following:

1) Navigating the qualification process - I have been told that NQ interviews are particularly challenging. Did you prepare extensively to ensure you secured a place in your chosen department? Did you consider applying externally?

2) Technical ability - You mentioned that some trainees may do mundane tasks during their contract. How does one develop technical ability if so and how were you able to demonstrate the legal knowledge you acquired on qualification?

3) Commercial awareness - has your approach to developing commercial awareness changed at all following qualification? Were you expected to demonstrate a higher level of business acumen?

4) Attention to detail - developing this skill has been particularly challenging for me and the pressure to achieve perfection can be overwhelming. Did you receive any form of training to develop this skill?

Thanks again for your contribution to the Forum, it's really appreciated.

Thanks, @KM6363. In order to make my answer as efficient and as easy to follow as possible, I shall address your questions in the order you presented them.

Question 1 - Unfortunately, the process at my Firm was to put down two preferences for qualification. I had to write a brief argument for why I would like to join the department, but fortunately, there were no interviews. Thus, I did not prepare extensively for this. I also had numerous conversations with the head of the department beforehand which meant I felt somewhat at ease going into the process. And no, I never considered applying externally.

Question 2 - I am not sure I completely understand your question so if my answer is insufficient please do let me know. If you are asking me how do you improve when faced with mundane tasks, the answer is simply, you do the tasks well and ask for feedback on how to improve. You may be asked to draft a set of board minutes for multiple entities that don't differ. Maybe the first time you make a few mistakes; the next time you do slightly better. However, by asking for feedback along the way, you will improve and maybe learn about new ways to approach the task. In terms of when this comes to qualification, the proof is in the pudding. If you have improved each time, then the department will be able to see your development.

Question 3 - I think over the years it has changed, especially when moving to the role of an Associate. The reason is that, as you spend more time working in a particular sector, you start to notice what developments impact your clients. It is your role to then create materials which inform your clients of said developments or factor these in when it comes to the deal itself. As a trainee, you will not be expected to do this.

Question 4 - Unfortunately I did not. It is something I heard in every mid-seat review and I still hear it today. Some people are naturally better at it than others, that's just a fact of life. However, there are things you can do to improve. I suggest printing out anything you need to proofread. Also, if time permits, walk away from the task. I often find that with a good night's sleep, you will notice errors that you may not have noticed in the evening / early hours of the morning.

I hope this advice helps!

 

[LM]

How difficult is it to move firms as an NQ?
Say if someone did their TC at a niche (but nonetheless international/commercial) firm, and decided to qualify in corporate or another more generalist practice, how difficult would it be to move to a global/US/MC firm?

Thanks, @TCIlluminatioMea. Unfortunately, this is a question that I can't provide much insight on. I have never tried to move from my Firm. That being said, in my time at the Firm, I have never seen an NQ hired. Hires primarily occur from mid-levels (or at least 2PQE) upwards. This is due to the fact that global/US/MC firms already have large intakes and favour promoting internally.

 

[LM]

Hi LM, thank you so much for creating this forum,

What would you say are the benefits of working at a global law firm in terms of the quality of work - Firms often refer to the added layer of complexity of multi-jurisdictional or cross border deals but what does this mean for work of the lawyers at the firm in practice?

Relating to this, how does a global law firm delegate work requiring expertise in multiple jurisdictions i.e. how much exposure does a lawyer get to the work relating to another jurisdiction; is it matter of delegating wholly to the relevant office and piecing everything together later?

Thank you!

My pleasure @Simran_K_Kambo. To answer your first question, from a lawyer's perspective, it primarily means you have to be liaising with local counsel on a regular basis and be able to work with them to get the deal done. This can range from local regulatory issues to navigating unique legislation. The role of a lawyer at a global law firm is to understand these issues and ensure the transaction documentation takes account of these issues/obstacles. Further, you get to deal with bigger names. I would say those are the two standout differences to someone who works at a large national firm.

To answer your second question, the short answer is, the work is primarily done by local counsel due to the fact they are qualified to advise in that jurisdiction. If the deal is being "run" out of London (and by this, I mean the client is communicating only with a legal deal team centered in the London office), the London team will communicate with local counsel in all the relevant jurisdictions and then, compile their advice and reflect it in the transaction documentation.

 

[LM]

Hi @LM , thank you for taking the time to provide such detailed answers!

I have a couple of questions:

1. How do you manage your workload day to day?

2. In an earlier post, you mentioned making mistakes. I was wondering how you dealt with making mistakes (since they’re inevitable). By that I mean mistakes that you’ve realised yourself and mistakes that have been pointed out to you.

Thank you!

Thanks, @NicN. In terms of managing my workload day-to-day, the main way is through the effective use of my outlook calendar. I make sure it is always up-to-date (thanks to my wonderful PA) and block off time when I need to get a task completed. I also use a pen and paper and list out all the tasks I need to complete. I then tick each task off as I go.

Making mistakes is an interesting topic to discuss. I have always taken mistakes to heart and it is an area I am always trying to improve on. For example, during my early years, I would go back to old emails I sent to see if I made spelling mistakes. If I had, I would beat myself up (not literally, of course). This is an incredibly self-destructive habit. However, I have learnt to control this urge, as I have realised it doesn't bring me any happiness nor does it improve me as a lawyer. When I notice a mistake, what I try to understand is why it happened and if needed, ask the relevant individual about improving so that it doesn't happen again. The same goes for when someone points out a mistake to me.

Great question!

 

[LM]

Thanks @LM. When applying, what were you looking for in your training contract and do you think you found it?

Thanks, @Lumree. I can answer this in a couple of sentences. I was looking for a Firm that would enable me to get exposure to a wide variety of work, across a variety of jurisdictions and that kept doors open for my career rather than closing them. And yes, I absolutely found that!

 

[LM]

Hi @LM thank you for your time to answer questions.

It’s been interesting to read about the differences between advisory and corporate departments, especially how advisory departments research aspects and feed back to the corporate team on a deal. I was wondering how you would describe a finance department, would the role they play be similar to an advisory department on a deal or more similar to a corporate department, or different altogether?

Thank you

Thanks @PB. Unfortunately I have little to no experience in a finance department so I can't provide that much advice on this topic. However, from what my colleagues who work in finance departments have told me, I would say the work is closer to a corporate department. This is primarily due to the fact that you are negotiating transaction documentation (much like a Corporate seat) and you are driving the deal. I hope that helps!

 

[LM]

Hi @LM thanks so much for agreeing to do this thread - I know I can speak for everyone when I say reading your thoughtful responses has been really insightful!

Firstly, I wondered what made you decide to undertake further study now?

Secondly, you said that you did several vacation schemes, what factors led you to pick the firm you did to train at?

Finally, I wondered if you could explain how your role has changed as an associate? Is the jump from trainee to qualified associate a big step up?

Thanks again,
Dan

Thanks, @Daniel Boden. I shall answer all your questions individually.

Question 1 - I don't know how others in the TCLA community have felt about the GDL/LPC process, but I found the whole experience to be somewhat rushed. I was never able to engage in discussions about certain topics and I found that to be deeply unsatisfying. Now that I have been qualified for a while, I feel that I have a much clearer understanding about what area of law I am interested in and where I see my career going, and this further study compliments that. This is the first reason. The second reason is because, as you get older, life gets in the way of these opportunities and I want to seize these opportunities while I am still able to.

Question 2 - This goes back to a question I responded to earlier. Primarily it was because I felt this particular firm didn't close any doors to possible career paths and in fact, introduced me to doors I didn't even realise were there. Further, I love my department and the people I work with and I genuinely enjoy going to work each day, doing the type of work I specialize in.

Question 3 - It is a big jump. There is much less support when you become an Associate and the amount of work you have to juggle increases exponentially. However, the two years of training prepares you (somewhat for this) and you are able to handle matters on your own when the time comes. So overall, the workload increases and so does your involvement on the actual deal itself.

 

[LM]

Hi LM,

I am a corporate solicitor (2 yrs PQE soon) with a focus on M&A work, I trained and qualified at a regional firm. I am eager to move to London and work in the corporate department of a top firm. However, many of the vacancies I want to apply for require that the applicant trained at a City firm.

I am looking for some insight into what was expected of you as an associate so I can compare the skills and experience I have to that level of expectation. For instance, I am aware that firms expect their juniors to be commercially aware, but could you give me an example of a situation where you would be expected to apply such knowledge?

As another example, when I attended a ULaw PSC course in London the teacher seemed to suggest that she would expect trainees (in her previous role) to be able to calculate and comment on a company's financial leverage ratios after reviewing their accounts in anticipation of a kick-off meeting. This is beyond what would be expected from a trainee at my firm but it would be helpful to know if this is the standard at your firm? What would be the expectations of a corporate junior in a client meeting? If I draft a lengthy email or prepare a shareholders' agreement, I would take time editing it - were you in an environment where there was an expectation to get the drafting right the first time, particularly in terms of efficiency?

You mentioned in a previous post points about thinking on your feet and trusting that someone can carry out good quality work - are you able to add context to this? Is good quality work something that is correct and produced in a timely manner or does it go the extra mile to add value for the client in some way? I ask because I sometimes overlook what I am already achieving when I do not know where the benchmark is.

I understand working in London would involve longer hours; greater volume of work; tighter deadlines; larger teams; more demanding clients and deal values are much higher, but I am looking for more specific insight into what is expected in terms of knowledge and experience. What was your role in respect of transactions, for example?

In my current position, I work directly for partners who worked at international City firms for a substantial period. I am:

- regularly the first point of contact to clients (CEOs/ owners of mostly private /family-owned businesses);
- responsible for aspects of transactions (disclosure, ancillary docs, organising signing/closing) usually valued at up to £20m;
- project managing transactions; and
- responsible for leading smaller deals, including negotiating key documents with the other side.

In general, what I would like to be able to assess is whether I meet the knowledge / experience criteria of my City counter-part and work to fill any potential gaps where I do not.

Finally, thank you for starting this thread - I find that there is much less information available concerning career progression once you qualify unless you have the benefit of a mentor.

Thank you for your time.

V

Thanks, @VLV for the interesting question. After reading your queries, I believe the most helpful response I can provide comes under the heading of "the role of a junior associate in a city law firm".

Overall, the role of a junior associate in a city law firm is to first and foremost, provide value add to the transaction and do the majority of the heavy lifting. By this I mean they are supposed to act as the main point of contact for the various other departments that are providing input during the due diligence process. While they may be involved in helping draft the transaction documentation, running signing and completion checklists, running due diligence reports, leading client discussions, etc.

Regarding being "commercially aware", I don't think there is an expectation (as such) to be able to read a company's accounts and provide comments! I think what is more important, in regard to being commercially aware, is being able to spot trends that impact the Firm's/department's client base. For example, I would expect someone of your level to be aware of the National Security and Investment Bill and how this would impact a transaction. A knowledge of these large-scale market trends that provide opportunities for global firms to provide advice to their clients is what city firms are looking for in their recruits. I can put your mind at ease and say I have never been tasked with reviewing a company's accounts in preparation for a kick-off call. Also, there is no real expectation that you will get everything right the first time. Drafting is partially down to the person reviewing so there will always be amendments and changes due to personal preference. Overall, it sounds like you have as much experience as I have, maybe on a slightly smaller scale in terms of deal size and the fact your deals (I presume) are national and not global.

My main takeaway for you is that you should not downplay your abilities, especially when it comes to interviews. It sounds like you have great experience and your uncertainties are getting in the way of you making the jump. All I can suggest is to give it a go ... what's the worst thing that could happen?

 

[Numerius Negidius]

Hi LM,

Thank you for your insightful replies to everyone's questions above! Here are my questions:

1. Do you find that the number of hours you work in actuality is lower, similar, or higher than your billable hours target (if you have one)?
2. You mentioned above that during your secondment, you primarily practiced US law. Did you have to become NY qualified before going on secondment? Were there any challenges adapting to their legal system or familiarizing yourself with New York laws? Did you do anything to prepare before you began your secondment?
3. Are NY secondments competitive at US firms?
4. What are the prospects of a US firm NQ or 2-3PQE transferring to a US office? If it is difficult, is the main challenge immigration restrictions, them preferring US-educated candidates, or competition, etc?

Thanks for your time!

 

[LM]

Hi LM,

Thank you for your insightful replies to everyone's questions above! Here are my questions:

1. Do you find that the number of hours you work in actuality is lower, similar, or higher than your billable hours target (if you have one)?
2. You mentioned above that during your secondment, you primarily practiced US law. Did you have to become NY qualified before going on secondment? Were there any challenges adapting to their legal system or familiarizing yourself with New York laws? Did you do anything to prepare before you began your secondment?
3. Are NY secondments competitive at US firms?
4. What are the prospects of a US firm NQ or 2-3PQE transferring to a US office? If it is difficult, is the main challenge immigration restrictions, them preferring US-educated candidates, or competition, etc?

Thanks for your time!

Thanks, @Numerius Negidius. My responses to your questions are below:

Question 1 - It depends on the time of year. Over the summer I usually find that unless I have a number of deals going on, my billable hours will be lower than my target hours. This is due to the fact that clients tend to go away on holiday. September to December are usually the busiest months. Every year so far I have exceeded my target hours quite comfortably and have never felt like this was not going to be the case.

Question 2 - No I was not NY qualified. There were some challenges but nothing that was insurmountable I would say. Due to certain restrictions, you have to have an E&W solicitor supervising you in situ, so I was able to ask them if I had any US legal queries. And no, I didn't do anything to prepare beforehand.

Question 3 - Not from my experience, however, currently due to the pandemic and the travel ban, I don't believe many firms are sending trainees to the US. However, this is just my own opinion and may not accurately reflect the wider approach taken by city firms.

Question 4 - Quite slim for an NQ but the chances become greater the more senior you become. This is because they have a sufficient pool of new hires from Law School (which thus decreases the need for NQs). However, in my personal opinion, an NQ is far more qualified than a 1L or 2L in a NY firm, but that may be me being biased. At present, the NY legal market is desperate for more mid levels, as a number have gone in-house; as a result it is at this level that most transfers take place.

One final point to note is that my first course for the TCLA shall cover international and client secondments so definitely worth watching for further info!

 

[Jessica Booker]

How difficult is it to move firms as an NQ?
Say if someone did their TC at a niche (but nonetheless international/commercial) firm, and decided to qualify in corporate or another more generalist practice, how difficult would it be to move to a global/US/MC firm?

I think that would be tricky. Your experience will not be aligned to what other candidates in the market have, where they have gained direct experience in those generalist areas.

I have known it to happen but it’s typically where the associate has gained very specific sector experience and developed strong knowledge of a set of clients (the two that stand out for me are someone who had oil and gas experience, and another with a strong pharmaceutical client roster) and the firm really needed someone to come in with that expertise more so than the specific “core practice” knowledge.

 

[Daniel Boden]

Thanks, @Daniel Boden. I shall answer all your questions individually.

Question 1 - I don't know how others in the TCLA community have felt about the GDL/LPC process, but I found the whole experience to be somewhat rushed. I was never able to engage in discussions about certain topics and I found that to be deeply unsatisfying. Now that I have been qualified for a while, I feel that I have a much clearer understanding about what area of law I am interested in and where I see my career going, and this further study compliments that. This is the first reason. The second reason is because, as you get older, life gets in the way of these opportunities and I want to seize these opportunities while I am still able to.

Question 2 - This goes back to a question I responded to earlier. Primarily it was because I felt this particular firm didn't close any doors to possible career paths and in fact, introduced me to doors I didn't even realise were there. Further, I love my department and the people I work with and I genuinely enjoy going to work each day, doing the type of work I specialize in.

Question 3 - It is a big jump. There is much less support when you become an Associate and the amount of work you have to juggle increases exponentially. However, the two years of training prepares you (somewhat for this) and you are able to handle matters on your own when the time comes. So overall, the workload increases and so does your involvement on the actual deal itself.

Thanks a lot @LM!

Just as a follow-up to your response to my first question, was it easy to get your firm to sign off on your period of further study and I assume you'll be returning to your firm upon completion of your study programme? Is it common for a firm to sponsor an associate in further study just as some industries may do if an associate wants to do an MBA?

Forgive all the questions, I'm just curious as to how this process works as it's something I may consider as I too share your concerns about the rushed nature of the law conversion process as there are some things I've enjoyed studying but only have scratched the surface of due to the obvious course and time constraints.

Thanks!

 

[Jacob Miller]

Hi @LM,

Been great having you on the team recently and I wanted to extend my thanks on behalf of all the members for you taking the time to help everyone out.

I did want to ask a couple of things, and would really appreciate any input you have on them:

1- what are three things you wish you'd known about life as a trainee before you started your TC?
2- what do you feel are the top things which separate a 'good' trainee from a 'great' trainee?

(It feels odd to be the one asking questions rather than answering them now! )

 

[LM]

Thanks a lot @LM!

Just as a follow-up to your response to my first question, was it easy to get your firm to sign off on your period of further study and I assume you'll be returning to your firm upon completion of your study programme? Is it common for a firm to sponsor an associate in further study just as some industries may do if an associate wants to do an MBA?

Forgive all the questions, I'm just curious as to how this process works as it's something I may consider as I too share your concerns about the rushed nature of the law conversion process as there are some things I've enjoyed studying but only have scratched the surface of due to the obvious course and time constraints.

Thanks!

Thanks, @Daniel Boden. The conversation is never easy because, by and large, a firm will want its employees to be working. I believe the reason why my further study was accepted is because it is quite specific to the sector I work in. I also have a fantastic relationship with my head of department. A firm will usually sponsor exams for qualifications but the entire further study / course is usually not sponsored. And yes, I will be returning to my firm upon completion of my further study. Overall, I feel that if you establish a good relationship with your department and you are open with them about your goals / interests, a firm will be more willing to allow a period of further study.

My main takeaway for you Daniel is pretty simple - it never hurts to ask.

 

[LM]

Hi @LM,

Been great having you on the team recently and I wanted to extend my thanks on behalf of all the members for you taking the time to help everyone out.

I did want to ask a couple of things, and would really appreciate any input you have on them:

1- what are three things you wish you'd known about life as a trainee before you started your TC?
2- what do you feel are the top things which separate a 'good' trainee from a 'great' trainee?

(It feels odd to be the one asking questions rather than answering them now! )

Many thanks @Jacob Miller for the warm welcome.

Question 1 - I get asked this question a lot and I always find it hard to answer (which is usually the sign of a great question). In general, I would say I haven't ever really thought "oh I wish I knew [x] or [y]". The reason for this is because the training contract is about you learning and developing, and this is obviously unique for each individual. If you knew everything beforehand, you wouldn't learn anything. That being said, I want give you some good takeaways so I shall endeavour to actually answer your question! So the three things I wish I knew are:

1) The training contract is a marathon, not a sprint. Taking on too much work from the beginning may lead to burnout and can lead to poor quality work. Therefore, especially during your first seat, take your time to settle in and don't feel pressured to say yes to every single piece of work that comes your way.

2) You are your own worst enemy. In a previous post I talked about making mistakes and checking through old emails for typos. I have learnt that beating yourself up over past mistakes is useless; the most important thing is to accept mistakes will be made and your objective should be to try and learn from them.

3) Your intake can be your bedrock. When I started my training contract I did not spend much time with my intake. Maybe I thought I was "too cool for school", but over time, I established some really strong connections with members of my intake that I am still close with today. These individuals can really help you in your time of need and can be the perfect resource for "silly" questions.

Question 2 - Another great question. I would say: (i) they go the extra mile by thinking ahead and progressing workstreams without me asking them to; (ii) show a real interest in issues affecting the department; and (iii) they generally find ways to make my life easier.

Hopefully my responses help, but please let me know if I can expand on the above.

 

[Jacob Miller]

Many thanks @Jacob Miller for the warm welcome.

Question 1 - I get asked this question a lot and I always find it hard to answer (which is usually the sign of a great question). In general, I would say I haven't ever really thought "oh I wish I knew [x] or [y]". The reason for this is because the training contract is about you learning and developing, and this is obviously unique for each individual. If you knew everything beforehand, you wouldn't learn anything. That being said, I want give you some good takeaways so I shall endeavour to actually answer your question! So the three things I wish I knew are:

1) The training contract is a marathon, not a sprint. Taking on too much work from the beginning may lead to burnout and can lead to poor quality work. Therefore, especially during your first seat, take your time to settle in and don't feel pressured to say yes to every single piece of work that comes your way.

2) You are your own worst enemy. In a previous post I talked about making mistakes and checking through old emails for typos. I have learnt that beating yourself up over past mistakes is useless; the most important thing is to accept mistakes will be made and your objective should be to try and learn from them.

3) Your intake can be your bedrock. When I started my training contract I did not spend much time with my intake. Maybe I thought I was "too cool for school", but over time, I established some really strong connections with members of my intake that I am still close with today. These individuals can really help you in your time of need and can be the perfect resource for "silly" questions.

Question 2 - Another great question. I would say: (i) they go the extra mile by thinking ahead and progressing workstreams without me asking them to; (ii) show a real interest in issues affecting the department; and (iii) they generally find ways to make my life easier.

Hopefully my responses help, but please let me know if I can expand on the above.

This is amazing, thank you so much!

Slightly following on from your second point to question 1, can I ask a little about how you managed/ dealt with making mistakes etc as a trainee? Like what you said, I'm my absolute worst critic and have a bad habit of getting into my own head when I make a mistake - second guessing a lot of what I then do and letting a single error spill into other things!
One of the only things I'm nervous about before starting the TC is the inevitability of making errors, so any input would be hugely appreciated.

 

[LM]

This is amazing, thank you so much!

Slightly following on from your second point to question 1, can I ask a little about how you managed/ dealt with making mistakes etc as a trainee? Like what you said, I'm my absolute worst critic and have a bad habit of getting into my own head when I make a mistake - second guessing a lot of what I then do and letting a single error spill into other things!
One of the only things I'm nervous about before starting the TC is the inevitability of making errors, so any input would be hugely appreciated.

Hi @Jacob Miller. Not a problem and happy to help. If you look at entry #46 of this thread, I have discussed dealing with mistakes. For your reference I have also provided the relevant section of my response below, emphasising in bold and italics the most important info:

"Making mistakes is an interesting topic to discuss. I have always taken mistakes to heart and it is an area I am always trying to improve on. For example, during my early years, I would go back to old emails I sent to see if I made spelling mistakes. If I had, I would beat myself up (not literally, of course). This is an incredibly self-destructive habit. However, I have learnt to control this urge, as I have realised it doesn't bring me any happiness nor does it improve me as a lawyer. When I notice a mistake, what I try to understand is why it happened and if needed, ask the relevant individual about improving so that it doesn't happen again. The same goes for when someone points out a mistake to me."

Hopefully this helps!

 

[Jacob Miller]

Hi @Jacob Miller. Not a problem and happy to help. If you look at entry #46 of this thread, I have discussed dealing with mistakes. For your reference I have also provided the relevant section of my response below, emphasising in bold and italics the most important info:

"Making mistakes is an interesting topic to discuss. I have always taken mistakes to heart and it is an area I am always trying to improve on. For example, during my early years, I would go back to old emails I sent to see if I made spelling mistakes. If I had, I would beat myself up (not literally, of course). This is an incredibly self-destructive habit. However, I have learnt to control this urge, as I have realised it doesn't bring me any happiness nor does it improve me as a lawyer. When I notice a mistake, what I try to understand is why it happened and if needed, ask the relevant individual about improving so that it doesn't happen again. The same goes for when someone points out a mistake to me."

Hopefully this helps!

Thank you. I read through the thread and this must have been the only post I accidentally glossed over! haha.

Really appreciate the advice.