- Sep 14, 2023
- 1,273
- 1,723
The two questions are very similar indeed, I totally appreciate the confusion here. I think for me the main difference that I notice is that the first question seems to suggest that you should talk more about your skills and qualities, both professional and personal, and link them back to the firm. For example, you could elaborate on the fact that you really enjoy helping others and you have volunteered for X amount of time at X charity. You are planning to do the same at the firm, developing your skills as a lawyer, through their pro bono opportunities such as X (you do your research here as you want to show you know a lot about the firm too). This is the kind of approach I would take here.Hii @Jessica Booker Wanted to ask what the difference is between - "Why do you think we should consider employing you?” and “What experiences (if any) have you encountered to date that you feel may be brought with you to the firm and from which we may benefit?” and how to go about both?
For the second question, I would consider it as a 'why me' question, drawing more from your experiences, mainly the corporate/professional ones. This basically requires you to illustrate the experiences, both academic, extracurricular or professional up to date, that you feel will make you an outstanding candidate compared to your peers. Additionally, you should elaborate on the skills you have developed through those, which will make you a successful future trainee lawyer. For example, if you decide to talk about being president of a university society, what kind of skills you have developed from that? Maybe time management and leadership skills, communication and team-work perhaps too? How are those going to make you a successful trainee? You should elaborate on those.
I guess there are different ways you could go about them but this is the approach I would personally take. I hope this is useful and good luck with the application!