@Andrei Radu @Jessica Booker @Amma Usman @Ram Sabaratnam Hi guys, I just wanted some advice on the 'why this firm' element of a question. Do you think it is acceptable to talk just about for example training or do you think it could be quite generic. Would you suggest for the 'why this firm' aspect to link it back to a practice area or deal
Hey there
@Unknowncabbage ,
This is a really good question. I personally struggled with this element, specifically due to the need to show
specificity, as
@Jessica Booker and
@Andrei Radu had mentioned.
Now, on the training point, many firms offer similar training structures. Thus, it’ll be generic to mention a broad point on training such as secondment opportunities, an exposure to bro bono, and the likes. One area I have succeeded in mentioning with regards training is the small trainee intake of some firms. Now, even this would be generic without specificity. The way I navigated this was through saying why that size appealed to me, such as the exposure to more responsibilities early on in my career. Now, even this is just a level 1 answer. Following this, I would talk about how I thrived in a similar environment to showcase the skills I had and how they would transfer to that unique structure.
As
@Andrei Radu said, training is not as strong as other points such as work -
practices. Thus, this should be backed up by other, more specific points to fully cement your answer.
I’ve made a thread on this which I’ve linked below;
https://www.thecorporatelawacademy.com/forum/threads/why-this-firm-🤔💭-crafting-applications.9119/