Transitioning to a Law Firm from In-House

I would like to transition back to law firm life after working in-house for the last six years — what kind of hurdles should I expect?

Of course, every case is going to be different, but as more and more of the in-house attorney workforce attempts to make the move back to law firm life, they are finding out it is not as easy as it once was to obtain a position at a law firm. As everyone is probably aware of, the downturn in the economy has meant that a lot of in-house positions that arose in the past have disappeared. These attorneys are finding it harder to find positions in law firms than those who stuck it out in law firms for several reasons. Here are some ways of getting around that:

1. Many law firms want to believe that the sole purpose of your life is to come in every morning and bill hours in the name of the firm. While it is not necessarily true that attorneys who stuck around the law firm scene are more willing to believe this, many firms will take your in-house experience to mean you were trying to get away from the more demanding workload that law firms require. One way to get around that is to seek out so-called “lifestyle firms” or firms that don’t necessarily expect you to bill 2,500 hours a year and will probably not hold you to such a high standard when it comes to your dedication to law firm life.
2. Another reason that law firms can sometimes be hesitant to take on attorneys that have been working in-house is that they believe that the work required in corporate environments is not as strenuous as that required in a law firm. This can translate to them not believing that you can handle the work that they need their employees to do. Emphasize the work you have done that is on par with work that law firm attorneys do in your resume and make your prior law firm work prominent.
3. Law firms like attorneys that are going to be loyal. Despite the fact that more attorneys are switching firms than ever before, partners like the idea that the attorney they hire laterally will try to make a home in that firm for a long while. By leaving law firms altogether, you have already made them suspect. Perhaps this is not as easy to get around as the others, but if you truly emphasize how much you desire to work in a law firm, some employers will take that into consideration.

Last, but far from least - if you can bring work from your former corporate employer to the law firm, that would (for obvious reasons) be a big bonus in getting you hired. This may not be feasible, but if it is, it could go a long way to getting you any law firm job you want, especially if the business you bring with you could potentially net the firm a lot of money.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

How Do I Increase My Marketability After a Layoff?

As I currently approach my 4th month of unemployment after being laid off from a major firm, I am wondering if there is anything I can do to increase my marketability to law firms? I cannot change my past work experience or my law school credentials, obviously, but is there something else I could do that I am overlooking?

Being out of work is frustrating, for sure, and the feeling that there is nothing you can do to change your current situation probably increases your stress level exponentially. As you said, what’s done is done, and you have to focus on the future. We have seen far too many attorneys literally give up on the practice of law entirely after getting laid off during their first few months of practice. In the past several months we have seen attorneys who graduated from Top 25 law schools and worked for a few months at AmLaw 100 law firms before getting laid off become (1) a restaurant hostess, (2) a garbage man, (3) a salesperson in a men’s boutique clothing store and (4) a trainee assistant manager of a Pizza store. Nothing is wrong with any of these occupations; however, if these choices were motivated by the perception that no attorney jobs were available, these occupational choices were wrong. More often than not, the attorneys who give up are those coming from the largest and most prestigious firms. Their thoughts run something like “If I cannot practice at a very high level, I do not want to practice at all.” We believe this thinking is severely flawed because, as this article will demonstrate, you can find another job if you approach your search in the right manner.

First, you need to think geographically. You are currently living in the worst market in the country. Barring circumstances that tie you to the Seattle region indefinitely, a move to a healthier marketplace will provide you with more available opportunities, which will give you more opportunities for success. One of the strangest phenomena we have ever witnessed is talented attorneys who give up on the practice of law because they refuse to move. Detroit, Michigan used to be one of the largest legal markets in the United States several decades ago and, by today’s standards, there are fewer than 10 large law firms there. If attorneys continued to stay there instead of following the jobs, their chances for employment would be significantly reduced. While the change from an industrial-based to an information-based economy is certainly beyond the scope of this article, the fact of the matter is that certain legal markets simply contract at various points in time. Many of these markets never return to their former glory. Who knows if Silicon Valley or Seattle, for that matter, will ever be what they once were. The point is you should not let geography influence your future. You went to law school for a reason and your current geographic location should not be something that you let influence the next 25-plus years of your life.

There are tens of thousands of law firms throughout the United States and the idea that one of them does not have a job waiting for you is an absurd thought. Unfortunately, far too many attorneys accept this thought. Does this really make sense to you? If you have been practicing long enough for a legal recruiter to represent you (usually one year), then you should contact one and let them help you in your search. If not, you should find a way to apply to as many of these law firms as quickly as possible in order to increase your chances of getting hired. While job boards do not traditionally have advertisements for entry level attorneys, you should review as many potential openings as possible. In addition, you should investigate using a service such as Legal Authority to try to apply for positions in your existing market or other markets that interest you. It is extremely unlikely that you will not find a position with an aggressive approach.

Second, if you are just considering the largest, most prestigious firms, you may have to aim a little lower. While we most likely would not have said this in the heyday of the economic boom, at a time when many large firms are severely restricting their hiring, it may make sense for you to consider taking a position at a less prestigious firm. You may come across a smaller firm that might actually be in “growth mode,” unlike larger firms in the area that are experiencing financial troubles. While we are not advocating working somewhere that you regard as beneath you, giving smaller-to-midsize firms a chance should not necessarily be considered settling. When the economy does recover, your resume will look a lot better for having worked somewhere than if you were to be unemployed for a few years. It is possible that you will like the different atmosphere of a smaller firm, and perhaps your experience and know-how can even help that firm grow.

Third, you may be able to find immediate employment with the government. Clerkships, often seen as the domain of newly-minted attorneys, can increase any attorney’s marketability. More law students are likely to search for a clerkship as first-year associate hiring dwindles, so the competition may be tough, but your experience may impress a judge enough to take you on. Not only will you be working, but you will be learning more about the justice system which can only help when the clerkship ends and you want to seek out a law firm opportunity. In addition, you may be able to locate an opportunity in a local prosecutor’s office. In any of these jobs, you will begin to develop the skills of an attorney that you do not necessarily learn during law school.

Fourth, your law school record may be etched in stone, but there is always the opportunity to go back to school and further your education. While LL.M degrees are not for everyone, they have proven to be an asset to some attorneys who can get them in the right areas and at the right schools, especially for those with somewhat unimpressive law school records. Similarly, for intellectual property attorneys, getting an advanced degree in engineering or even one of the natural sciences could help your cause.

In conclusion, while none of these methods are guaranteed to get you a job, anything is worth a shot in dire times. The economy will recover, as it always does, and when that happens, it will be better to have built up some experience and improved your resume than to have sat back and ridden it out. The holy grail of many firm lawyers is partnership at a large firm, and the best way to obtain that is by proving yourself consistently throughout your career, no matter what roadblocks stand in your way.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

It’s Not YOU, It’s the Economy

One of my favorite New Yorker cartoons goes like this.  A man and a woman are sitting across from each other in a cafe.  The woman says to the man, “It’s not YOU, it’s me.  I don’t like you.”

Given the harsh economy we’re all dealing with, I think of this cartoon on a regular basis, though in a slightly different context.  I’m the woman and my would-be candidates are the man; however, the difference is that I LIKE my would-be candidates and wish that I could work with them.  Alas, the deterioration of the market place prevents me from taking on most of the people that contact me.  This will change, of course, once the market improves, but I write today to console those of you who have been, or will be, rejected by a recruiter.  It’s not YOU, it’s the economy.

Like medicine, I believe that one of the first rules of recruiting is “to do no harm.”  As a recruiter, and a former practicing attorney, I know the market place and it’s my duty to be as honest with would-be candidates as possible.  Lately, this means turning down some terrific attorneys whom I would have gladly worked with at this same time last year.

Why so selective?

Because here in the Bay Area the talent pool is spilling over while the jobs are drying up.  And so, if you are a general litigator with no book of business, you are most likely competing with the hundreds of attorneys who have recently been laid off.  But you do have resources.

Here is a link to yesterday’s Legal Pad where an associate discusses the success a friend off hers has had using Legal Authority (a sister company of BCG): http://legalpad.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/02/advice-for-a-jobhunting-associate-considering-a-new-practice-area.html

Also, for those of you who are frustrated in your job search and feel that there must be some AMLAW firm out there who will hire you, here is a webiste to LawShuck’s lay-off tracker:  http://lawshucks.com/layoff-tracker/.  The intent of providing this site is not to scare the beejesus out of you but to help you make informed decisions.

For example, maybe you will decide to stay in your current job and hang on tight for as long as possible.  Or, if you have been laid off, maybe you will be open to exploring the smaller markets that haven’t been as impacted as the large cities.  If you have specific questions about the Bay Area market, I am happy to help.  But if I’m unable to work with you in finding a job, please remember, it’s not YOU, it’s the economy.

-Erin

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Should you talk about other interviews in your interview?

One of the questions I receive quite often from attorneys I am working with is whether or not they should talk about other interviews while they are interviewing with a law firm.  Let me emphasize one thing: This is one of the more important questions you will ever be asked in an interview.  Regardless of your qualifications, how you respond to this question will have a direct bearing on whether or not you receive an offer from the law firm asking you this question.  Be very careful as to how you answer this question.

At the outset, it is important to point out that you do not have to answer this question but should.  This question will also often not be asked.  Indeed, it is my opinion that this question is entirely inappropriate.  In no instance should you even volunteer this information unless you are asked. The problem is that if you are asked this question you will look bad if you refuse to answer it.  Not answering the question gives the employer the impression that you will similarly “hide the ball” when you are working for them.  It also does not do much to assist you in establishing a bond of trust, empathy and understanding with potential new employer.  Therefore, it is my opinion that his question must be answered. There are two important rules you must keep in mind when answering this question.

First, you need to understand that most firms are unlikely to give you offers unless they think you are their first choice firm.  There are certainly exceptions when firms make offers to people who they do not think are their first choice law firms.  As a general rule, though, if a firm believes you are their first choice you will be better off.  Because I am a legal recruiter, I see instances all the time when attorneys go to work for law firms that initially were not their first choice.  Many firms are very good at recruiting and can convince most people to join their firm when they extend offers-even in the face of competing offers.  Nevertheless, for the most part a firm wants to believe you are their first choice and this will have a direct bearing the substantial majority of time on whether an offer is extended.

Second, how you justify why you are interviewing with the firms you are interviewing with will also have a direct bearing on whether or not the firm makes you an offer.  In addition to knowing that you are their first choice, law firms also want to know that you are likely to remain with them after joining.  They also want to know why they are the best fit among potentially competing offers.  Furthermore, the law firm wants assurances that it is not making a mistake making an offer to you.  How you justify where else you are interviewing will have a direct impact on your potential success in terms of getting an offer.
1. Before You Ever Tell An Employer Who Else You Are Interviewing With The Firm Must Believe You Are Their First Choice

I have a quick story from personal experience that is related to law firm interviewing-albeit, indirectly.  I am an Area Chair for the admissions office of a major American university in Los Angeles.  In this position, I am largely responsible for ensuring applicants to the University in my area are interviewed.  While I am not the one making the ultimate decisions as to whom the school admits, I do put together reports on everyone I speak with and express my enthusiasm (or lack thereof) for each applicant.  I would have a hard time believing that my reviews do not carry at least some weight in the admissions process.  This year I probably interviewed 50 students for the school.  This school is generally ranked a “Top 10″ American college; however, in some years it is slightly lower.

As is typical of most interviews, I speak with the high school students about their dreams and aspirations for college and ask them why they are interested in attending the University.  Because I also attended the school, I have a decent understanding of the sorts of students that are likely to be happy and fit in well at the school.  This experience is derived largely from personal experience of having attended the school myself.  In my experience, the sorts of students I believe would be a good fit for the school are also the same sorts of students who seem the most enthusiastic to me and give me the most compelling reasons for wanting to attend.

One challenge of these interviews is trying to decide who among a great number of highly qualified individuals really wants to go to the school. If someone is not qualified for the school, my job is easy because I know they will be rejected.  Because the University is a highly ranked school, the majority of students I speak with inevitably are applying to schools like Princeton, Yale and other similarly situated schools.  Accordingly, one of the first questions on my mind is this: Why my school and not another highly ranked one?

This situation is compounded by an obvious fact: While I certainly believe the school I am interviewing with is the top university in the United States (and could argue convincingly about this all day) it is not the number one ranked university and probably has never been.  Now if I was interviewing for a university consistently ranked number one in the United States, I would think that the university was every student’s top choice.  Because it is not the top university, I know that several people I am speaking with would probably rather go to a more prestigious university.

Now if you think about this, this rationale is very similar to what goes on when law students and attorneys are interviewing with law firms.  In an extreme, if you are interviewing with Skadden Arps Slate Meager & Flom (”Skadden”) and a small 15 person law firm in New Jersey that pays less than half of what Skadden does, most rationale observers would presume that you would rather go to Skadden than the small 15 person law firm.

Imagine for a moment what the 15 person law firm is thinking if you tell them that you are interviewing with Skadden.  Do you think that you would really want to go there?  Now imagine what Skadden is going to think if you tell them you are interviewing with the small 15 person law firm.  They are likely going to think that you are not that marketable, for one.  Or they might think that Skadden is a reach for you and want to help you advance.  You need to put yourself in the shoes of the person making hiring decisions because what they think will determine whether or not you are ultimately hired.

Why do I ask myself if the student really wants to attend the university I am interviewing for? I ask myself this question because I want to make sure that if I put a strong recommendation behind the person they are likely to attend the school.  Do not get me wrong: If you are a stellar applicant you will still get a stellar recommendation.  But someone who really wants what you are offering is always going to be far more attractive than someone who does not.

What the University does with this information is their business.  However, I do like to be able to say “the University is this person’s first choice and I am confident they will come if they are admitted.  I believe the person that the school is their first choice because of X, Y and Z.  Furthermore, they are the sort of person I imagine would do quite well there because they share so much in common with others students I knew while there.”

When a law firm is interviewing you, the same sort of logic applies.  Law firms receive numerous applications from highly qualified individuals constantly.  If a law firm thinks you will never take an offer from them, they are not going to be interested in speaking with you.  In the event you do get an interview, if the law firm thinks you are just looking to go to the most prestigious law firm (and they are not that prestigious) then the law firm is not likely to make you an offer.

As an aside, I should note that I see this sort of phenomenon all the time.  I deal with attorneys at some of the top law firms in the world on a daily basis.  Many of these attorneys want to go to smaller firms that pay far less.  While most of these attorneys are under the impression that the smaller firm would “die” to have them, the opposite is most often true.  If the attorney is coming from a far superior law firm, the smaller law firm and its attorneys might be intimidated by hiring the attorney because they never worked in such a smaller law firm.  People do not like to spend time with those they think (or others think) are superior to them.

You can draw on personal experience in this analogy.  One example would probably be a lot of your high school friends if you went to a public school and now practice law.  A lot of these people probably have not done much with their lives.  You are not the same people anymore and they are not as comfortable around you anymore.  They are uncomfortable because they perceive inequality.  Surely this does not apply to all your past friends, however, I am confident it applies to many of them.  Regardless of how you may feel with this continued association, they are not like as likely to be as comfortable.  This is also one reason people do not tend to marry outside their social class, for example.  It creates too many difficulties due to a perceived superior and inferior role.  No one likes to be around others that remind them of their potential inadequacies.  Law firms are the exact same.

I am an expert in getting attorneys jobs inside law firms.  I know nothing about in-house placements, or other sorts of legal-related placements.  Law firms, by their nature, are strange and unique creatures.  Law firms want to save face.  Having someone take another offer over them makes the law firm look bad in their eyes.  It makes them feel inferior.  This sort of event makes it seem to the attorneys that interviewed the candidate that the other law firm is a more attractive alternative.  It is also a negative vote of confidence from you if you do not take an offer if one is extended.

So how does the question of whom you are interviewing with fit into the equation?  First, you need to answer this question.  This question will rarely be asked at the beginning of the interview, though.  This is a very important question to answer and it must be answered correctly.  Before you ever answer this question, though, the law firm you are interviewing with must-and I mean must-know that they are your first choice.  If the firm thinks this then telling them everywhere you are interviewing can help you.

Back to the situation with the 15 person New Jersey firm.  You could still very easily get an offer from this firm if you play your cards right.  First, you need to walk into this interview and convince the firm that you really want to work there.  Maybe you know someone at the firm that has said good things about it.  Maybe they practice in an area of law you have been interested in since high school.  Maybe their office is right across the street from your house.  Maybe you want to work in a smaller firm so you can make partner.  You need an arsenal at your disposal to give the law firm compelling reasons for hiring you.  If you give the firm enough reasons that you are a good fit, they will look upon the fact that Skadden is interviewing you as something that verifies your worth in the market.  The firm needs to think that you will be their first choice over Skadden.  You taking an offer from them over Skadden will be a major vote of confidence in the small firm that is something the firm will use to impress upon its attorneys as to what a great place they are.

When I am interviewing candidates for the University, I can answer the question of whether or not the candidate is really interested in my opportunity in several ways.  For example, if the student has 1580 on their SATs, is Captain of the football team, student counsel president and first in their class and my school is the only top school they are applying to then my job is easy. The student most likely is most interested in what my school offers.

Even if the student is applying to several more prestigious schools, I can still judge whether or not this same applicant really wants to attend the University by several methods: (1) If their parents went to the University and they have always wanted to go there, (2) If they attended the University for summer school, (3)  If they worked for a professor of the University during high school, and (4)  If their life has been profoundly influenced by the work of some professor they want to study under.  You should get the idea.  Even without this a stellar applicant will still get serious consideration.  The point is your interviewer wants to say “this school is their first choice and I believe it.”

A law firm wants the same assurances that they are your first choice.  These assurances need to be given at the interview stage and they need to be given early on. This is not an article about interviewing and I cannot tell you how to interview.  I can tell you, though, that when a law firm believes you are their first choice you will have a better chance of getting an offer with the firm.

In an improving market (which this is) you are likely to get more than one interview and may very well end up with several offers. Accordingly, you may often be asked in interviews who else you are speaking with and so forth. How you address this question will actually have a strong bearing on whether or not an employer hires you.

2.                 How You Justify Why You Are Interviewing With Other Firms Will Have A Direct Bearing On Whether Or Not The Employer Hires You

There are several scenarios that you should be aware of and each one merits a separate response.  If you have prepared the interviewer properly, you will do very well when asked where else you are interviewing.  The potential scenarios are: (a) you are not interviewing with any other employers, (b) you are interviewing entirely will less prestigious firms, (c) you are interviewing with a mix of firms, corporations and other types of employers, (d) you are interviewing with a mix of more prestigious and less prestigious firms, and (e) you are interviewing with all more prestigious firms.  Given the importance of each of these hypotheticals, they will all be discussed below.

a.                  You are not interviewing with any other employers

If you are not interviewing with any other employers then you should tell the firm so.  If you are in law school and this is occurring, the firm should be under the impression that you are just starting the interview process if this is the only interview you have so far.  Employers do not want to feel as if you are the black sheep and someone without a lot of options.

If you are interviewing laterally, it is perfectly acceptable to tell the employer that you are not interviewing with any other employers.  In this situation, the rationale for having only one interview should be that (1) you are not interested in a new job for the sake of a new job, and (2) the only reason you are speaking with this firm is because they are a perfect fit for your interests.  The firm needs to think they are a perfect match for you.  There are several additional reasons firms like to hear you are interviewing only with them:

?It makes you look loyal to your current employer-by stating that you are interviewing with only one employer, it makes it seem as if you are not doing an “all out” search to find new positions.  You are only interested in this one interview because the firm matches what you are seeking so closely.

?It puts the firm in a position where they know if they make you an offer you are likely to take it-By having only one interview, the firm can give itself more assurances that if an offer is made to you that you will likely take it.

?It puts the firm in a position where they know if they make you an offer you will not choose one of their competitors over them-If you inform the firm that you have only one interview, the firm will have the assurance that they will not look “lose face” if you take an offer from one of their competitors.

b. You are interviewing entirely with less prestigious employers

There are some potential positives to this admission.  The positives are:

?Since we are the best firm, if we make the candidate an offer they will most likely come here.

?If the firm is more prestigious than the one you are currently at, the employer will think that you are trying to “move up”.  It is almost axiomatic in American culture that we respect individuals who are trying to move up and improve their lot in life.  After all, most of our ancestors were immigrants at some point and moved up the ladder.  Indeed, some of their offspring are now even lawyers!

If you tell your interviewer that your other interviews are will less prestigious employers, you may have a problem.  Here, the firm will certainly think to itself: “Can’t this attorney get an interview with better firms?  Is there something wrong with them that we are missing?”

In this situation, you need to be very careful.  One way to approach this is to state that you only are applying to places with openings and these are the only firms you are aware of with openings.  In this way, the firm will believe that you are applying to these other firms and them simply in response to what you know.  While in all likelihood you probably applied to more prestigious firms and have not heard back or were rejected, if the former is true you need to make the firm aware of it.

The most important thing you can do in this situation is to make it clear to the firm that you are qualified to work for them.  For example, if you are interviewing with less prestigious firms that pays far less then tell the more prestigious firm that money is not a concern for you.  Here, you can tell the firm you are most concerned with finding the “right fit” and that the less prestigious firms have a lot of attributes that might not be immediately transparent.  In this instance, you put yourself in the position of someone who is more concerned with practicing law in the right environment than someone who is concerned with making as much money as possible.  This sort of characterization can only help you.

There are many ways to get creative with this response.  In sum, the most important thing you can do in a situation where all of your interviews are with less prestigious firms is to make the firm aware that (1) you are very interested in them, (2) seeking to move up, and (3) most concerned about finding a good fit.

c.       You are interviewing with a mix of different classes of employers such as law firms, government offices and corporations

This is also a potential problem for you.  If you are interviewing with different classes of employers beyond law firms then you also need to be extremely careful.  The problem with this is that law firms are unique institutions.  Most law firms have a billable hour requirement, have a division between partners and associates, encourage you to develop business and so forth.  While I have written extensively on this topic before, the point is that law firms are unique institutions that have great respect for their own way of practicing law but look down on those who do not practice law under their methodology.  For example, many law firm attorneys consider government attorneys lazy bureaucrats and look upon going in-house as a way to escape the pressure of law firm life.  While these generalizations are not necessarily true, what is important to realize is that law firms think this way and believe that individuals that do not want to practice inside a law firm are not cut out for law firm life.  Accordingly, telling a law firm you are interviewing with the government or and in-house employer is not necessarily in your best interest.

How you address this question is up to you.  You must tell people where you are interviewing.  If you are asked what other law firms you are interviewing with, then tell them what other law firms.  You need to be honest with employers and not doing so is not only ethically wrong but will come back to haunt you.

If you are interviewing with an employer that is different than a law firm and are asked about this, you are going to need to let the employer know why you are going out on these interviews.  There can be many potential explanations.  Perhaps a friend asked you to interview with an in-house employer, you are interested in environmental law and interviewing with the environmental branch of the United States Department of Justice so you can get more experience doing environmental trials.  Whatever the explanation you give for these other interviews, though, it is essential that you let the firm know that (1) a law firm is your first choice and (2) the other employer represents an opportunity for you to get significant experience and “move up” in terms of your skill level and so forth with a law firm.

In any law firm interview you go on, one of the most important things you can do for yourself is leave the firm with the impression that your actions in seeking to leave your current employer are motivated to “move up” and become a better attorney.  However you phrase the fact that you are interviewing with other types of employers than law firms, this point needs to be made.  Law firms want to hire winners.  The fact that you are interviewing with non law firms interviews a lot of potential doubt in the law firms mind that you are not committed to practicing law in a law firm.  Make them think the alternatives you are exploring to this are just as demanding.
d.      You are interviewing with a mix of more prestigious and less prestigious firms

The issue in this situation is about the most normal occurrence for attorneys interviewing with law firms.  Most attorneys that are interviewing are speaking with more prestigious and less prestigious firms.  Here, your case does not need to be as compelling.  Like in all the situations discussed above, the employer still must be left with the impression that they are your first choice.  In addition, the employer must have a basis for understanding why you are interviewing with more than one firm.

Assuming that you have done your job of giving the employer the impression they are your first choice., the employer should also understand why you are speaking with so many different sorts of law firms.  Here, the employer needs to be aware of why you are doing such a broad search.  Accordingly, the employer needs to be aware of why something is seriously wrong with your current employment situation.

This is again a delicate topic.  In all interviews you never want to leave the employer with the impression that you harbor any sort of ill will towards your current employer.  Employers typically do not like attorneys who say bad things about those they work for because they believe that they could one day be on the opposite side of this.  This simply makes you look bad.  What you do need to do in the interview, though, is convince the employer that your current employment situation is preventing you from reaching your full potential.  You need to project that you are leaving your current employer because you are trying to grow.

By upward momentum, I mean that your desire is to be better at you job, get more business, get better work and so forth.  In sum, you should always try and portray yourself and your job search as follows:

While your decision to join your current employer was a good one, you have continued a pattern of “growth” that has characterized you from the very beginning and is evident in everything you have ever done.  While it is unfortunate, your current firm is limiting your growth potential.  The environment of the firm you are interviewing with offers this growth potential and that is why you are speaking with them.  In fact, the growth potential of the firm you are interviewing with offers is “hands down” the best of the bunch in terms of the employers you are speaking with because of X and Y and Z …

If you were someone in charge of determining who you were going to hire, which candidate would you want to hire (1) someone without compelling reasons for being interested in your firm, (2) or someone who needs the environment your firm offers to grow?  I am sure you can see the logic of this.

It is a fundamental human characteristic that we want to feel good about ourselves.  Finding someone who needs an organization like ours to thrive and letting them work with such an organization is something that makes hiring authorities feel good about themselves.  You need to give employers compelling reasons for hiring you.

Moreover, giving yourself “upward mobility” makes you sound like a winner and not a loser.  People want to associate with winners and not losers.  Firms want to hire winners and not losers.  Give yourself upward mobility.

e. You are interviewing entirely with more prestigious firms

Given what has been said above, this section should not require a great deal of analysis. Here, you want to make the law firm believe that they are your first choice and that you will accept an offer from them if extended.  The firm needs to feel special and understand your reasons for choosing them over competing opportunities.
3. Conclusions

You need to understand that how you address where else you are interviewing will have a major impact on whether or not you are hired.  This, in fact, is one of the more important secrets to interviewing effectively.  If there is one thing you take from this article it should be this: Always make the firm you are interviewing with feel like you are their first choice.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Long Term Success in With a Single Employer

If you go into any firm that has been around more than twenty or thirty years you will inevitably find a handful of attorneys who have been there from the very beginning of their careers.  These well adjusted souls will typically report to work each day at a similar time and have managed to be the only ones presumably left in the law firm after generation upon generation of attorney coming and going.

Many attorneys do last for decades in the same firm and there are characteristics which uniformly seem to characterize these sorts of attorneys.  While I am a legal recruiter, I do have a great deal of respect for attorneys who in this day and age are able to “stay put” at the same firm for a long period of time and remain at single firms throughout their careers.  None of this is to say there are not really good and solid reasons for leaving a law firm or other legal environment if the going gets impossible.  I am the first to admit that there are legal employment environments that can be intolerable for many.  Nevertheless, you need to keep in mind that if a legal employer has been around for 30+ years there is a chance the employer is doing something right.  Before leaving it is often wise to take inventory of yourself.

There are certain characteristics that tend to characterize attorneys who stick with the same legal employer for long lengths of time and also certain characteristics of this sort of employment situation.  These characteristics are discussed below:

1. Attorneys Who Remain With the Same Firm for Long Lengths of Time Are Generally Very Committed to Their Jobs

Many people were raised with the idea (or have the idea) that fidelity to an employer is something that is simply expected.  The unwritten rule is that if you are not treated horribly then there is really no reason you should ever end up leaving a job.

One of the saddest but also the most refreshing things I have seen as a legal recruiter is when I interview and meet with attorneys who have been with the same firm for 20 years or more and whose firms are going under-or who are in a position of being forced to look for other opportunities.  When attorneys like this look for a new position their rationale is most often that something profound has happened at the firm that is making their separation necessary.  These attorneys appear as if they are going through a divorce or have just had a death of someone they are very close to.  For these sorts of attorneys, leaving a position is something that would be unthinkable and only in the event of a massive trauma.

This sort of fidelity between employers and employees reminds me often of people who have been married 50 years or more.  There is a mutual respect that comes out of this and a thinking that both need one another.  I believe that this sort of thinking is really missing in this day and age.  While this may not seem related to careers, a statistic I once saw in a social science class showed that as divorce rates went up in society so did rates of drug abuse, suicide and other associated societal ills.  The bond between an employer and an employee is a powerful force that in its best form is much like the bond between a husband and wife with a very committed relationship.  Both sides respect and accept one another with certain conditions but for the most part unconditionally.

The attorney who is committed to their job is in many respects similar to someone who is committed to anything-there may be something else out there but they have decided to remain loyal.  This sort of attitude is a very healthy one I believe and can also make these sorts of attorneys very settled.  I know an attorney that was called by a rival firm and offered over $1,000,000 a year by this firm when he was making just barely above half of that.  He was not interested in the money and was more concerned with the bond he had with his current firm.  This is how it works when there is commitment on both ends.

2. Attorneys Who Remain With the Same Firm Are Not Interested in Office Gossip or Reasons Not to Succeed

In every organization there are typically people who are not succeeding at their jobs.  These people generally are not doing their work in a competent manner and are also often looking for ways to cut corners with their work.  Most organizations will generally call out this behavior and then speak with the employee. Some employees correct their behavior and others simply get mad at the organization.  Some employees may be mad at their organizations for no particular reason at all-or may be angry with a previous organization and simply transfer their anger to their most recent organization.  I remember a recruiter once telling me never to hire someone who had been fired from their last job.  People who have been fired from their last job will typically take out their anger on their next organization he told me.

With anger a part of every legal employment organization, you need to understand that there are always going to be people in the organization who have a lot of anger towards their employers.  These angry employees will start rumors, attempt to share their anger with others in the organization and often subtly (or not so subtly) forecast “gloom and doom” for their employer.  This is how rumor mills get started and these sorts of rumor mills are prevalent in every legal organization there is for the most part.

Attorney who remain with their employers generally do not participate in these rumor mills or even pay attention to them.  At certain times in an employer’s history there are likely to be calls of “crisis” of seemingly epidemic proportions as lots of people leave, for example.  At other times there will be other issues.  The overwhelming characteristic of attorneys who remain at firms for long periods of time is that they generally pay no attention to these rumor mills whatsoever.
3. Attorneys Who Remain With the Same Firm for Long Periods of Time Generally Are Not Interested in Being Grandstanders-They Are There to Do Their Jobs and Do Them Well

I once heard someone say that the most successful people are often the most screwed up.  I am not sure if this is true, but there is some wisdom in every saying like this.  Attorneys who are able to remain with the same employer for long periods of time are generally not concerned with “getting ahead” to the same extent as many other attorneys are.  Many attorneys who are extremely concerned with getting ahead will often leave saying they are looking for better opportunities because they are interested in immediate advancement.  In other cases attorneys will try and show up various attorneys in their firm.

Attorneys who remain at their firms for long periods of times are generally most interested in just doing their jobs.  They have faith in their organizations and that things will work out for them.  They are not loud and do not go out of their way to attract attention to themselves.  Their main concern is to simply do the best job possible.

What ends up happening to attorneys who remain focused on their work and not grandstanding is they end up getting ahead while other attorneys end up putting their foot in their mouth.  I remember when I first started practicing an attorney who was first in his class from a major law school and the Editor in Chief of his school’s law review.  Everyone thought this particular attorney was really on his toes and someone likely to have major success at the firm.  This attorney wrote articles on his spare time, argued with firm partners about the finer points of law (and was right when he argued).  While this attorney was very smart he thought he was so good that he ended up sabotaging his career in the long run when he called a newspaper to discuss a case he was working on and ended up being quoted on the front page of the Los Angeles Daily Journal.  The fallout from this incredible incident that the attorney left the law firm a month or two later and never worked for a large law firm again.

These sort of incidents aside, it is important to keep a moderately low profile in order to have long-term success in a law firm.  It is never wise to raise your swords and capture the limelight.  While someone can win a sword match for some time, they will eventually lose-and in a sword match (which your legal career could be compared to)-the loss is usually permanent.

4. Attorney Who Remain With Their Firms for Long Periods of Time Are Typically Do Good (But Not Necessarily ‘Brilliant’ Work)

An attorney who remains at their firm for long periods of time typically has learned to “pace themselves” and manages to do work on a day-to-day basis that is good but not necessarily extraordinary.  This does not matter.  I would estimate that the majority of the battle of being an excellent attorney is simply showing up.  Sure some people can do extraordinary work; however, the brightest flame is not always the longest burning flame.  The ability to consistently show up and do the work is the most important aspect of being a long-term performer in a law firm.

The smartest attorneys out there are often the ones who end up having the most problems in the practice of law.  Attorneys who can consistently show up for work and do an excellent job send the message to colleagues, clients and others that they have the ability to get the job done.  In the end it is all about getting the job done.

5. An Understanding of ‘Insiders’ and ‘Outsiders’ Typically Develops Between Attorneys Who Remain At Their Firms For Long Periods of Time

After an attorney has been with a law firm for an extended period of time and understanding develops between that attorney and others who have been at the firm a long period of time.  An institutional understanding also develops.  This understanding seems to say something to the effect of “people may come and go but we are the ones who are committed to this organization and we are the heart and soul of this place.”  A similar sort of understanding that develops is that “we owe each other because we have each demonstrated a commitment.”

Bonds form between people who have been part of the same organization for long periods of time.  These bonds are often invisible-but they are real bonds.  These bonds are powerful and make the organization and forces within it come to the defense of those who are committed to the organization during times of organizational change and reorganization.  These sorts of bonds are something that get stronger over time as an organization changes.  After some time attorney who have been with the firm for decades are simply treated as part of the very fabric of the firm and virtually unquestioned.

Conclusions

While it may seem odd for a recruiter to write a story in defense of attorneys who remain at their firms for long periods of time, remaining with a firm for a long period of time is something that is meaningful in this day and age. There are many characteristics that of attorneys who remain at their firms for long periods of time and these characteristics in my experience are usually found in most attorneys who demonstrate this level of stability.

A final factor is that in my experience attorneys who remain with firms for long periods of time are often less tormented than the average attorney.  By looking for reasons to like and respect their organization rather than find fault, they find themselves in organizations which ultimately welcome them.

Finally, it is always important to remember that if a law firm or other legal organization has been around for 20 years or more the chances are it is doing some things very right.  There will always be people who succeed in these organizations and, of course, always those who leave or fail.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

A Fast Way To Torpedo Your Career Backward or Move Forward

Birds of a feather flock together.
If you’re an eagle, don’t hang around chickens:
Chickens can’t fly.

 If there is one thing that can assist you in ruining your legal career in the most rapid way possible it is to make the mistake of choosing the wrong friends at work.  Far too many attorneys realize this crucial mistake and end up torpedoing their careers due to this.

On my spare time I spend several days per year interviewing students interested in attending the college I went to.  In these interviews I am continually reminded it seems of something that is profoundly true in many respects: the environment people spend their time in has a tremendous influence on who they will become.  In Los Angeles there are a few private schools where an astonishing 30% or more of the class ends up going to ivy league colleges.  When I meet kids from these schools there is often a real discernable edge to them that I pick up even before I get around to reviewing where they went to school.  The kids are polished, they speak with confidence, they are knowledgeable about the world in a sophisticated sort of way.  What these sorts of generalities have shown me is that the environment these kids are coming out of has a tremendous impact on who they eventually become.

There are attorneys inside law firms and other legal organizations who are clearly and unequivocally on the way up.  There are also attorneys who are clearly and unequivocally on the way down.  If you spend your time at work and outside of work with attorneys who are on the way up you too will be whisked towards achievement.  If you spend your time at work with attorneys who are on the way down you too will gravitate towards losing.

I have noticed a few trends which continually seem to repeat themselves over and over again in every organization I have been associated with.  This was also something I noticed when I was practicing law.  The scenario is this.  Try as any organization might-whether they are hiring graduates of the best law schools, the best firms, or the people with the best records or not - people are sometimes going to be hired who do not do their jobs all that well.  The people may be lazy and not value their jobs.  The people may have been fired from their last employer and have anger towards employers in general.  The people may be angry at the organization and the world that they are not making a $1,000,000 a year.  The people may be incompetent and unable to complete tasks.  The people may have interpersonal problems with other employees.  The person may not be able to receive direction from their superiors.  The person may have been treated unfairly by the organization.  All sorts of scenarios are possible.

What happens when there is an angry person inside an organization that the organization is “down upon” is that some of these people improve, some leave, some do not improve and means get “sour grapes” and become angry with the organization.  The sour grapes response is most common because it is always far easier for many people to blame others for their shortcomings than take responsibility themselves.  This is the common response.  For some “sour grapes” people will begin attempting to infect others with their dislike of the organization and find fault with the organization and its people with about every chance possible. They literally create ”cancerous cells”.  The people who find themselves in the circle of friends with this person in the organization will generally become infected with this “bad attitude” as well and one by one the members of this group will generally either lose their jobs due to declining performance or they will leave the organization.

The reason that people close to negative people inside organizations also tend to become negative is because everyone all does things to cooperate or compete with people in their environments.  On one level this can be your circle of friends and on another level it can be the people within your firm.  This is the same reason I have noticed certain trends among the people from the best private high schools around Los Angeles, for example.

A. Drawbacks of Spending Time with Cancerous People in Your Organization

When you are inside a law firm or any other legal employer the most important thing you can possibly do is avoid “cancerous cells” and attempt to spend your time associating with people who are “winners” and likely to do well.  Let me briefly review some of the major drawbacks of spending time associating with cancerous people inside a legal organization or those on the way out:

1. By Associating with Cancerous People the Organization Will Assume that You Too Are a Cancerous Person against the Organization

When I was in high school I was best friends with a guy who got kicked out of school at the end of his junior year of high school for upsetting a particular math teacher in the school.  In my senior year of high school I asked this particular math teacher to write a recommendation to various colleges for me.  I also asked another math teacher to write a recommendation for me.  Despite what I thought had been a good relationship with the math teacher,  but this math teacher thought differently of me I believe after the incident with my friend.  In fact, his recommendation of me was so dire that when I was interviewing with one of the schools I had applied to the school itself told me they could not believe how bad the recommendation was and thought it “must be a joke”.

My own school later told me that this had prevented me from getting admitted to numerous colleges and one of my teachers subsequently told me that the reason the teacher had written since an awful recommendation was due to the fact that my friend had upset him so badly.  He said that the teacher believed there must be guilt through association.  Years later, I can see why he did this to me.

In every organization once the organization sees bad people they instinctively look for those around that person in order to identify other “bad people”.  In retrospect this makes perfect sense.  This reaction is almost “tribal” in nature and probably we are programmed like this on a genetic level so that we can avoid danger.  When you associate with negative and cancerous people they are likely to get you pegged in the same way.  This is not the wisest of career moves.

2. People Who Are Failing and Angry with Their Employer Are Having Issues with Their Organization Are Likely Doing Something to Cause This and Will Teach You to Do the Same

When people have tons of “sour grapes” they usually have these sour grapes for a reason-and it is generally because they are failing.  They may be failing because they are lazy, have tons of turmoil outside of work that makes concentration difficult, abuse substances at work to such an extent that they cannot do their job at work. Because they are in a job they cannot handle, they are upset and having issues; if you spend time with them they will teach you how to be just like them.

Once we get outside into the real world, the people who tend to be the most popular and liked the most by others are the people who have the brightest outlooks and make others feel good about themselves.  The people who are most alone are very good at doing the opposite.  Have you ever noticed that when you spend time around people who are happy you too feel happy?  Have you ever noticed that when you spend time around people who are gravely depressed you too feel depressed? The same goes for enthusiasm and other sorts of emotions.  I have known people who have become wildly famous and when I was around them before they became famous I too felt this enthusiasm.  I have known people who ended their lives and when I was around them I too felt their despair.  You become like the people you are around with.

In school if you spent your time with people who abused drugs you probably ended up doing this as well.  If you spent your time around athletes you too were probably an athlete.  The world works like this.  If you spend your time around people who are winning you too will end up winning.

B. Benefits of Spending Time with People on the Way Up in Your Organization

1. People Who Succeed Start and Finish Things

People who succeed do certain things and do them consistently.  People who succeed are the sorts of people who start things and then also finish them.  Anyone can start a project.  It is the people who start and finish projects who make the real difference.  People who achieve meaningful success know how to both start and finish things.  They will show you how to do this too.

In order to start and succeed things you need to exhibit a high level of self-discipline and a lot of people do not necessarily have self discipline.  People who discipline themselves know that success requires consistent follow through and always.  Follow through is something that will run off on you too if you hang around people with the ability to follow through.

2. People Who Succeed Over the Long Term Have Passion

You simply cannot succeed over the long term if you do not have a certain level of passion for what you are doing.  This passion is also contagious.  If you spend time with people who have passion then you will also pick up their passion.  Passion for your job is the rule among passionate people.

Some people receive inheritances.  Other people have powerful parents who get them the best jobs.  Other people get lucky.  However, over time the people who succeed are the ones who have passion.  Surround yourself with people who have passion-that makes all the difference.

3. People Who Succeed Share With You Their Insights

Different people cope with their work environments in different ways.  People who succeed and manage to find happiness in the work environments have a certain way.  When you spend time with successful people in your work environment the insights you get from them will rub off on you too.

4. When You Spend Time With Successful People You Too Become Associated With Success in the Eyes of Your Superiors

When you spend time with successful people you will also become associated with success in the eyes of your superiors - in most cases.  Your superiors will see you as someone interested in learning how to succeed at your work as well.  They will see you as someone who is part of the crowd of people on the side of the employer.

Conclusions

Select the people you spend time with both inside and outside of work carefully.  Some people and their careers are going up and others are on the way down.  This is something you can generally tell very quickly after spending time with people.  Once you learn to recognize those who make winning a way of life you too can succeed.  In order to grow you need to surround yourself with those who make growth a way of life.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

What I Have Learned About Interviewing In Law Firms

What are the most important rules of thumb for attorneys to remember about job interviews?
- Dress for success.
- Give concise answers. Long rambling answers will always negatively affect your chances of landing the job. Let the interviewers draw their own conclusions.
- Don’t get into detail about previous work. Revealing too much about old jobs, clients, or cases will make you seem untrustworthy.
- Be aware of your body language. You can say a lot without opening your mouth, so remain conscious of it.
- Be honest. You’re not expected to be superhuman, so stretching the truth can only get you into trouble.
- Be prepared. Come into the interview knowing what you want to get across and ready to take on some tough questions. Know what’s on your resume. Getting caught off guard by something on your own resume reflects poorly on you.

What is the best way to develop a rapport with the interviewer?
- A job interview is like a blind date in that both sides are a feel a little nervous and forced.
- Standard blind date rules apply: nice handshake, maintain eye contact, smile when appropriate, and always listen!
- Listening is the most crucial part. It can be difficult for attorneys to get out of talking mode, but the interviewer should do about 80% of the talking.
- Paraphrase what the interviewer says back to him or her to show you are paying attention.

Is there a decent way to answer the dreaded question “Tell me a little about yourself”
- Most people are uncomfortable with it, but it’s really a great opportunity to make an impression.
- Treat it like an essay in school and think about it before hand.
- Draw a correlation between how you describe yourself and the job description, be subtle, but connect your personality with the firm’s work.

“What do you know about our firm?” How can this question be best handled?
- If you’re using a recruiter, they will do the necessary research and tell you everything you need to know before hand.
- If not, always do your research. Use the Internet.
- Learn about the firm’s philosophy, successes, and history.

Can you recommend any particular resources for doing research on a firm prior to the interview?
- Most firms now have their own web pages. Try finding the firm on Google.
- Judged.com has law firm profiles, salary information and reviews from the attorneys who work there

What if you’re asked to address your personal weaknesses?
- This can be turned into a positive as well; say you’re a workaholic, that you can’t let a problem go until it is resolved.
- It’s best to keep everything positive, that way you create a positive association in the interviewer’s mind.

How do you address inappropriate questions, like are you married, or questions about politics?
- If you’re uncomfortable answering a question, and it is indeed inappropriate, just ask how it is related to the job.
- Be polite even if you think it’s inappropriate.

The adversarial nature of lawyers, does it work against attorneys in a job interview situation?
- A job interview is not a test of wills, it’s an opportunity to demonstrate that you can think, listen, and articulate.
-Coming off as pushy or arrogant is a turn-off. Even if the job requires aggressiveness, you don’t want to seem like someone who is difficult to deal with.

What’s the best way to summarize your entire background? Even for law students and young attorneys it can be difficult to encapsulate their whole history in a few sentences. For experienced attorneys, it can be a nightmare.
- Stick to what’s relevant for the job you’re applying to.
- Refer to the resume; make it easier for the interviewer.
- Bring a list of representative casework.

What about underqualified attorneys? How can they address a question about their background?
- The interviewer may have already made up their mind about whether you’re over or under-qualified, but you can make up for a lack of experience by expressing a personality match with the firm.

How about after the interview… thank you letter or no thank you letter?
- The cons of the thank you letter outrank the potential benefits.
- Even the most gracious and classy thank you letters can backfire.
- They can make you seem desperate like you have no other options.
- Its best to leave on a high note and thank you notes give you an extra opportunity to screw up.

What’s the best way to handle a bad interview?
- Put it behind you.
- Don’t let it get you down because everybody has bad interviews.
- The most important thing is to always appear enthusiastic. After a bad interview, be sure not to let it show in the next interview. Lawyers need to be “up” when appearing in front of judges or clients, so it is crucial to show that you have an upbeat personality.
- Getting rejected after an interview is usually not your fault. Internal firm politics and issues of personal chemistry generally play a very heavy role in employment decision-making.
How can a qualified attorney screw up in the interview?
- Showing up late is a sign of disrespect.
- Criticizing your last job is a major red flag.
- Lack of preparation will always make you look bad.
- It’s important to be confident, but don’t be arrogant or act like loose cannon. Never appear as though the job isn’t important to you.
- Don’t lie! Getting caught in a lie is the worst way to spoil an interview.

“Why are you leaving your present position?” or “Why did you leave your present position?” — how do you address this? What if you parted on bad terms?
- You never want to say anything negative about your old firm.
- You don’t want to seem like a gossip. They will think you might badmouth them if they hire you.
- Turn it into a positive. Say that you want increased responsibility with a firm that offers growth or a firm that is a match with your personality and skills.

What about “How did you do in law school?” Can you honestly answer the question if you didn’t do well in law school or went to a bad school?
- Be honest. If you had good grades or went to a good school, it’s a plus.
- If you don’t want to mention the grades, steer the conversation to something worthwhile you did in law school (extracurriculars).
- Don’t be embarrassed of “ok” grades; grades aren’t everything especially if you’ve been out of school for a while.

How important are the clothes you wear?
- Clothes aren’t the most important factor, but they can’t be underestimated.
- No one ever got a job for dressing nicely, but people have lost out on jobs for not dressing nicely.
- Always go for a more conservative style of dress:
-  Men: suit, tie, leather shoes
-  Women: business skirt, low-heeled conservative shoes; avoid perfume and flashy jewelry.
- Even if the firm is more casual, dress conservative for the interview.

Any advice for the shy? How do you appear to be confident when nervous?
- Rehearse! Write up practice questions and answers.
- Do it in front of the mirror.
- Have a friend or relative ask you questions.
- Be thoroughly prepared for every possible question. Its better to be over-prepared than to be caught off guard.
- Be conscious of the telltale signs of nervous behavior, fidgeting, stammering, saying “you know”
- Try to relax, but don’t get too relaxed. Revealing too many personal details, taking off your shoes, or treating the interviewer like one of your pals can make you look like a crazy person.

What are the differences in interviewing with a big firm vs. a small or mid-sized firm?
- Many big firms have a set of procedures for interviews and things are more rigid. They will often have callback interviews, which is not a guarantee that you will get an offer.
- Smaller firm interviews can be less formal sometimes, but you should always appear conservative even if the interview is less formal.

What are the differences between interviews with associates and junior partners and interviews with senior associates and partners?
- Junior partners and associates are still “gunners” who are often in competition with the rest of the attorneys. Do not act too competitive or they might see you as a threat. Act friendly.
- Older partners aren’t usually caught up in competition with the rest of the staff. They will want to see a competitive edge. They will also be more concerned with things like grades. Act hard working and determined.

How should an attorney handle an interview in an unconventional situation? Law firms will often take you out to lunch or for drinks to get to know you.
- The worst mistake is to get drunk. If the interviewer is drinking, have the same thing and take it very easy.
- Eat at the same pace as the interviewer and only order the basics. Don’t order an appetizer or desert if the interviewer doesn’t, etc. This ties right into the whole notion of appearing conservative at all times.
- Mind your manners and always treat your servers with respect. The same goes for receptionists in the office. No one wants to work with a jerk, so always be courteous to everyone in the entire job interview process.
- Don’t let your guard down. Unconventional interviews like this test mainly your small talk skills, but you should approach them with the same level of respect and enthusiasm as any other interview.

What about videoconference interviews?
- Technology is advancing and videoconferencing is becoming more and more common.
- It’s a great way to look for a job during a lunch break without battling traffic, etc.
- Don’t forget that they can see you. No nose picking, yawning, looking around the room.

How important is it to ask questions?
- It shows you’re paying attention and capable of critical thinking.
- Ask for more details about job responsibilities, how work is assigned, possibilities for advancement, and possibilities for independent decision-making.

What questions should be avoided?
- Don’t ask about salary, vacation time, working hours, start date.
- Don’t appear overanxious to get the job.
- Don’t express reservations about taking the job. If you have reservations, deal with them later. During the interview, your goal is to make a positive impression.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.