TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2022-23

[Future Six Figure Fee Earner]

I abandoned their app cus they have a VI which I think is annoying BUT for the first question I literally googled "2022 most innovative company awards" and things like that. Find a company, I think M&S won a lot of stuff and talk about a couple of their innovations or something then link it to something TLT has done, boots for example had some scheme (i cant remember the name) that helped people purchase from their website - that could be easily linked to client service.

For the sectors one I went on legal 500 rankings and looked at the "work highlights section" you can always do the simply google search of topic you enjoy then "tlt" for example "crypto advice TLT LLP", switch to the news tab and talk about that. The sectors are on the website so that gives you a general guide. I didn't actually do the app but lmk if u want me to elaborate anymore.

I seem to be seeing that a lot about VIs lol.

I’m doing the same thing as you btw and avoiding firms with VI.

 

[jomar]

Does anyone know roughly how many people pass Willkie's written exercise?

Have you gotten your time slot yet?

 

[sxw517]

my video interview link doesn't seem to be working at the deadline is tonight! any advice?!

Maybe screen record you opening the link, to show that it isn't working. Then you could email grad rec with this as an attachment.

 

[CorpLawyer00]

I seem to be seeing that a lot about VIs lol.

I’m doing the same thing as you btw and avoiding firms with VI.

Yeah to me it’s just bad news. I’ve stuck it out with a few firms I’m really interested in but they can’t even bother to see me personally? Why would I want to work for that firm? I don’t think it’s at all indicative of what the person is like. I’ve done loads of public speaking, debating and other things so don’t consider myself awkward or bad verbally but I find it so hard to look at the camera whilst talking to no one and seem normal, it’s very unnatural to not pick up on social queues from someone else or have gaps in your speech where somebody interjects or asks a follow up question.

another thing is that it’s so easy for people to game the process by asking a friend what the questions were so it’s even more unfair.

A much fairer assessment of a candidate in my opinion are their grades, extra curriculars, achievements and psychometric tests results. An interview with a real person is much more indicative of how a candidate will interact with a client.

It just seems like a cop out from a lot of firms tbh so trying to avoid VI firms.

edit: what you said about seeing this a lot is so true. I know it’s only anecdotal but some of the smartest students I know with the best grades are also avoiding VI firms. So whatever arguments there are about “finding talent from a wider pool” there seems to be an argument with at least some merit that some of the best candidates are no longer targeting those firms.

 

[HopefulFutureTrainee123]

Have you gotten your time slot yet?

Not yet - I was told that I'd get it this coming week

 

[jomar]

Not yet - I was told that I'd get it this coming week

Can you DM me? I can't seem to with my profile. Thanks.

 

[Ambs123]

starting to completely get why some people avoid firms that have a VI. I’ve done over 12 VIs now and have only passed one.

I feel like my speaking abilities and performance have really improved. I’ve used TCLA’s video simulator and also practiced with friends - but seem to still fail VIs! I really don’t get it

I don’t get what I’m doing wrong ??? It feels like I’ll never pass one - which is problematic for me this cycle since I applied to a lot of firms that require VIs :S

 

[Jessica Booker]

Yeah to me it’s just bad news. I’ve stuck it out with a few firms I’m really interested in but they can’t even bother to see me personally? Why would I want to work for that firm? I don’t think it’s at all indicative of what the person is like. I’ve done loads of public speaking, debating and other things so don’t consider myself awkward or bad verbally but I find it so hard to look at the camera whilst talking to no one and seem normal, it’s very unnatural to not pick up on social queues from someone else or have gaps in your speech where somebody interjects or asks a follow up question.

another thing is that it’s so easy for people to game the process by asking a friend what the questions were so it’s even more unfair.

A much fairer assessment of a candidate in my opinion are their grades, extra curriculars, achievements and psychometric tests results. An interview with a real person is much more indicative of how a candidate will interact with a client.

It just seems like a cop out from a lot of firms tbh so trying to avoid VI firms.

edit: what you said about seeing this a lot is so true. I know it’s only anecdotal but some of the smartest students I know with the best grades are also avoiding VI firms. So whatever arguments there are about “finding talent from a wider pool” there seems to be an argument with at least some merit that some of the best candidates are no longer targeting those firms.

I’ll explain why video interviews are used.

Firms used to rely on extra curriculars and grades, like you suggested is the better approach, for many years. But there used to be a massive impact on the diversity of candidates, particularly relating to social mobility, ethnicity and disability.

Many people in these categories are not time rich (eg they are working part time to fund university or often commuting some distance to university rather than living on campus) and others typically have other commitments that make their ability to commit to and achieve things more difficult.

In addition, someone’s achievements are one of the poorest predictors of performance in the job. I’ve done several bits of analysis for different firms to show this is the case. There is a bit of a predictor of performance in grades and then doing well in the LPC (and that seems to be replicated in the SQE at this early stage), but on the job performance was much more predicted by assessments at the later stages of the process (eg written exercises and cases studies).

But the problem is that you cannot invite everyone to these later stages. Firms are not going to spend the equivalent of several thousand hours of fee earner time interviewing more candidates. For one firm I worked with, they would only interview about 40-50 candidates a year, and because they were getting about 1200 applications a year, if they went purely on achievements and grades, their trainee intake would have been from a very small number of universities, and they would have predominately been white, middle class.

When we added video interviews in, all of a sudden we could assess about 4-5 the amount of candidates beyond their application form. When we did this, and still had the face to face process afterwards the diversity of the intake transformed and on multiple levels. Plus there was a much higher hit rate at face to face stage, meaning less time was needed to interview people. Put frankly, there are some people who can easily get past and application screen but they fail to live up to the person on paper, so it helped to verify the person was as good as they were saying they were on their application. The partners also felt the trainee intake had actually got stronger as collectively they were more diverse too.

If people choose not to do them, firms won’t lose out. There will be enough good talent out there who will. In fact, they’ll be quite happy if some people easily drop out because they are most likely less committed to that firm anyway.

I have seen the same arguments that people are put off from applying because of in appealing assessments for long application forms, psychometric tests, games based assessments and telephone interviews. It’s all down to people’s preferences of what they like and what they don’t.

The difference for the law firms is that it isn’t about what people dislike/like, it’s about what creates an efficient recruitment process with the best outcomes. And from my experience, and many other case studies I have seen, video interviews often provide that, especially if the firm is particularly focused on diversity and inclusion.

 

[Asil Ahmad]

How many words roughly should cover letters be? Doing my Travers Smith application, I know the rule of thumb is 1 A4, but after an estimate of how many words this should be? Thanks.

I say for them 500 words but for other law firms it should be longer. Also they have a Legal Cheek event on 10th January where GR will be there.

 

[Future Six Figure Fee Earner]

I’ll explain why video interviews are used.

Firms used to rely on extra curriculars and grades, like you suggested is the better approach, for many years. But there used to be a massive impact on the diversity of candidates, particularly relating to social mobility, ethnicity and disability.

Many people in these categories are not time rich (eg they are working part time to fund university or often commuting some distance to university rather than living on campus) and others typically have other commitments that make their ability to commit to and achieve things more difficult.

In addition, someone’s achievements are one of the poorest predictors of performance in the job. I’ve done several bits of analysis for different firms to show this is the case. There is a bit of a predictor of performance in grades and then doing well in the LPC (and that seems to be replicated in the SQE at this early stage), but on the job performance was much more predicted by assessments at the later stages of the process (eg written exercises and cases studies).

But the problem is that you cannot invite everyone to these later stages. Firms are not going to spend the equivalent of several thousand hours of fee earner time interviewing more candidates. For one firm I worked with, they would only interview about 40-50 candidates a year, and because they were getting about 1200 applications a year, if they went purely on achievements and grades, their trainee intake would have been from a very small number of universities, and they would have predominately been white, middle class.

When we added video interviews in, all of a sudden we could assess about 4-5 the amount of candidates beyond their application form. When we did this, and still had the face to face process afterwards the diversity of the intake transformed and on multiple levels. Plus there was a much higher hit rate at face to face stage, meaning less time was needed to interview people. Put frankly, there are some people who can easily get past and application screen but they fail to live up to the person on paper, so it helped to verify the person was as good as they were saying they were on their application. The partners also felt the trainee intake had actually got stronger as collectively they were more diverse too.

If people choose not to do them, firms won’t lose out. There will be enough good talent out there who will. In fact, they’ll be quite happy if some people easily drop out because they are most likely less committed to that firm anyway.

I have seen the same arguments that people are put off from applying because of in appealing assessments for long application forms, psychometric tests, games based assessments and telephone interviews. It’s all down to people’s preferences of what they like and what they don’t.

The difference for the law firms is that it isn’t about what people dislike/like, it’s about what creates an efficient recruitment process with the best outcomes. And from my experience, and many other case studies I have seen, video interviews often provide that, especially if the firm is particularly focused on diversity and inclusion.

Macfarlane's still holding strong and sending you through to an AC based purely on application form.

 

[Sachin Chandra]

For Kirkland VI > is it two questions? Each with 1 minute to prepare and 2 minutes to answer?

Thanks a bunch team. We are stronger together, united not divided.

 

[Sarah T]

Anyone heard back from pwc?

No

 

[Jessica Booker]

Macfarlane's still holding strong and sending you through to an AC based purely on application form.

Yes, there are plenty of firms who don’t use such assessments and still have success with their recruitment process that is relevant to them. And that’s the thing about individual firms, they all have different aims/objectives with their recruitment processes. What works for one firm shouldn’t necessarily work for another.

I am sure Macfarlanes have reviewed their recruitment process to check its validity as much as a firm that uses video interviews. From what I also know about Macfarlanes, they also invest heavily in the time dedicated to graduate recruitment. I have found similar firms (established offices, fewer offices, good long term retention of lawyers) tend to do this because of the amount of people resource available to cover it.

 

[hanz123]

Not a fan of video interviews, any advice on how to get it over and done with?
Got one for Clyde and Co.

 

[futuretrainee202X]

For firms that allow 4 pieces of work experience (and a box at the end of the section indicating other work experiences), would it make the most sense to input the most recent experiences? I have 13 pieces of paid and unpaid experiences that are impactful and showcase a range of skills and a little befuddled how to fit all this in.

 

[CorpLawyer00]

Not a fan of video interviews, any advice on how to get it over and done with?
Got one for Clyde and Co.

Know about the firm, just focus on staring at the camera and remaining as normal as possible. I think the thing I focussed on that transformed my performance the most was instead of "um ah" using silence. If i got stuck or didn't know what to say for a second I just didn't say anything rather than using filler; it always seems internally like the pause is much longer but in reality it looks fine to pause for a second or two to think. I would say that the SJT vi interview questions are impossible to prepare for but the motivational ones are basically what you would expect

 

[hanz123]

Know about the firm, just focus on staring at the camera and remaining as normal as possible. I think the thing I focussed on that transformed my performance the most was instead of "um ah" using silence. If i got stuck or didn't know what to say for a second I just didn't say anything rather than using filler; it always internally like the pause is much longer but in reality it looks fine to pause for a second or two to think. I would say that the SJT vi interview questions are impossible to prepare for but the motivational ones are basically what you would expect

Thank you

 

[futuretrainee202X]

Know about the firm, just focus on staring at the camera and remaining as normal as possible. I think the thing I focussed on that transformed my performance the most was instead of "um ah" using silence. If i got stuck or didn't know what to say for a second I just didn't say anything rather than using filler; it always internally like the pause is much longer but in reality it looks fine to pause for a second or two to think. I would say that the SJT vi interview questions are impossible to prepare for but the motivational ones are basically what you would expect

Honestly with scenario-based questions, once you pass 2-3 SJTs at other law firms, you get the hang of what they want to hear and can accordingly prepare for it.

 

[CorpLawyer00]

Honestly with scenario-based questions, once you pass 2-3 SJTs at other law firms, you get the hang of what they want to hear and can accordingly prepare for it.

yeah in an interview I had the partner was rlly nice about some competency questions I actually had a convo with her about some of what I was asked and law firms ask in general. They all basically want the same thing - show some individuality but obviously when something will impact the firm and leadership more confirm with associate blah blah.

 

[Jessica Booker]

You know more than me but a quick google of the most profitable law firms demonstrates that the vast majority do not have a VI stage. - Kirkland is probably the biggest outlier but to be honest from what I have seen their intake does not seem particularly diverse.

The impact on diversity is obviously a potential reason to use it but I think this is why a contextual view on grades is needed; my 3A*'s from a working class background and attending my local state school should count more than 3A*s from Eton.

I tend to find firms that are headquartered outside of London do have a very different approach.

But the importance of diversity is why many firms are using contextualised algorithms like Rare combined with other assessments, whether that be a video interview or a psychometric test (and in sometimes both).

Ultimately firms monitor these assessments carefully and work out how effective they are. They don’t just implement them without careful consideration and then will regularly review them.