Thank You Notes: Are They Still Necessary?

After completing a full day of interviews, a common question I receive from my candidates is whether they should send a thank you note to each of their interviewers.  There are two different schools of thought on this question, and I believe that there is no right answer.  Instead, I believe each candidate should do what makes him/her most comfortable.  While some believe that a thank you note is absolutely necessary, I believe sending a thank you note could actually hurt your candidacy if it is not done correctly.  In my personal experience as a member of the hiring committee at my old firm and a frequent interviewer of lateral candidates, a thank you note never changed my mind regarding a potential candidate.  My decision was always based upon my personal interaction with a candidate.  At most, a well-written thank you note from a candidate whom I had liked simply reaffirmed my positive impression.  However, it never changed a “no” decision to a “yes” decision.  Thus, I do not believe that thank you notes are absolutely necessary.  However, I am sure that there are many people who would disagree with me.  So, if you are going to send a thank you note, there are several important rules you must follow.

First and most important, make sure that there are no typographical or grammatical errors in your thank you note.  If necessary, have someone else (like your recruiter) read your thank you note to make sure that it does not contain any embarrassing mistakes.  This is your last impression with an interviewer, and you want to make sure that you do make the most of it.  For example, one of my colleague’s candidates met with two different firms on the same day, and was in a rush to send out his thank you notes when he got home that evening.  Thus, he typed out a simple, generic note and “cut and paste” the same thank you note to each interviewer.  Unfortunately, he forgot to change the name of the firm.  Needless to say, this made a bad impression on the firm and the candidate did not get the job offer.  It is impossible to say whether this one mistake was the reason for the firm’s decision, but it certainly did not help.

Second, do not send the same thank you note to each interviewer.  Make every attempt to personalize your thank you note in some way.  After all, interviewers have been known to  compare notes and you do not want your last attempt to leave a positive impression to seem false in any way.

Third, send your thank you note in a timely manner.  The purpose of your thank you note is to help solidify the hopefully positive impression that you made.  Typically, an interviewer completes an evaluation shortly after meeting with a candidate, and you want to make sure that your thank you note reaches the interviewer before that evaluation is completed.

Fourth, keep the thank you note short and sweet.  Do not use the thank you note as a means to repeat all of your qualifications and reasons why you believe you would be a perfect fit for the job.  Hopefully you will have already covered this during your interview as well as in your resume and your cover letter.

Lastly, the second most common question I receive after whether to send a thank you note at all is whether to send a handwritten thank you note or whether an email is sufficient.  I believe that either method is fine.  There are pros and cons to each approach which will depend on both the candidate and the interviewer.  For example, if your handwriting is hard to read or you do not have the ability to use formal stationery, you may opt to send an email.  An email will also be certain to reach the interviewer in a timely manner.  On the other hand, some interviewers may prefer the traditional approach of handwritten thank you notes, which unfortunately is impossible to determine.  Also, a well-done handwritten thank you note can win you style points.  At the end of the day, either method is fine.

Get Out The Vote!

With only five days left until Election Day, lawyers all over the country are getting involved to make sure that every vote counts in this year’s historic election. For example, Bingham will have over 120 lawyers monitoring polls throughout the country. The American Bar Association is encouraging lawyers to volunteer their services to staff telephone hotlines and to work as official poll workers to help ensure that voters know their rights and are not denied the right to vote. After all, lawyers are perfectly suited to meet the need for nonpartisan volunteers to answer any questions or address any concerns that may arise.

Don’t Be A Chicken Little

What’s On Your Facebook Page?

The National Law Journal recently published an article (http://www.law.com/jsp/legaltechnology/pubArticleLT.jsp?id=1202423725315&pos=ataglance) which discussed the fact that jury consultants and trial lawyers are now researching social networking sites and personal blogs to assist them in the voir dire process. Conducting Internet research has proven very useful by providing trial lawyers with valuable insight about potential jurors that is not readily apparent through voir dire. It appears that what people post on their MySpace or Facebook pages is far different from what they state on their jury questionnaires. For example, the article mentions a case where the defense successfully had a juror dismissed after discovering that the juror had lied on her questionnaire through an Internet search.

Jury consultants and trial lawyers are not the only ones who are using Internet research in this manner. Law firms often use the Internet as well to conduct informal background searches on potential lateral candidates. More and more firms are searching the Internet, especially social networking sites and personal blogs, to gain better insight into a potential candidate. Thus, before you start your job search, it is very important that the public information on your Facebook or MySpace page does not contain anything that you would not want a potential employer to know. After all, you never know who may be googling your name next.

New Insight into Retaining Female Attorneys

In case you missed it, the National Association of Women Lawyers (NAWL) recently released a report which recommends policies and procedures to help law firms retain female attorneys (http://www.law.com/jsp/law/sfb/lawArticleSFB.jsp?id=1202422998543). The ability of law firms to retain female attorneys has long been an issue, and hopefully this report will provide law firms with some new policies and procedures to help them increase the number of female attorneys within their ranks.

I believe one of the best methods to retain female attorneys is to create an effective flex-time program that does not leave either the firm or the attorney feeling short-changed. Specifically, the part-time attorney often ends up working a full-time schedule and ends up resenting the fact that s/he is being paid less than his or her full-time counterparts. One method to address this common gripe is to base a part-time associate’s compensation on the associate’s actual billable hours compared with the firm’s billing requirement. For example, if the part-time associate’s billable hours equal 75% of the firm’s billing requirement, then it seems only fair that the part-time associate should receive 75% of the compensation of a full-time associate. This is just one effective technique that I have seen a very well-regarded New York law firm use with great results. It is worth noting that this law firm is a long-standing member of the American Lawyer’s A-List, so it appears that it must be doing something right. Hopefully NAWL’s report will help law firms achieve the long-time goal of increasing their ability to retain female attorneys.

Going In-House: Look Before You Leap

I have recently spoken with several candidates who have expressed a desire to go in-house, and wanted to share some thoughts on making such a transition since I am a former in-house attorney. After several years of being a BigLaw attorney, I made the jump to go in-house at one of my firm’s clients, a very well-regarded private equity/investment management company. At the time, I wasn’t necessarily looking to make a move, but I didn’t think I should pass up such a great opportunity. After all, it had been ingrained in my mind that going in-house was the ultimate dream job for mid-level associates like myself. So, before I knew it, I had accepted my offer, given notice, and had started my new job as an in-house attorney.

I spent over six years at my in-house position, and feel very fortunate in that it proved to be an overall amazing experience. However, I think my situation was the exception to the rule as I have heard many horror stories that depict situations quite contrary to my own. The general thought is that going in-house means a better overall lifestyle, but that is not necessarily the case. In-house positions come in all shapes and sizes, and it is extremely important that you properly analyze each opportunity you come across because it can be extremely difficult to return to private practice, especially in this down market.

I recently wrote an article that discusses my experience as an in-house attorney because I wanted to help anyone thinking about going in-house understand the advantages and disadvantages of doing so before making that jump. Here is the link to the article: http://www.bcgsearch.com/crc/view-from-other-side.html. I hope you find it helpful!