There are only a few basic rules with respect to the type of questions you should consider asking an interviewer. Indeed, as far as some are concerned, there are only two such basic rules: first, any reasonable question reasonably asked is appropriate; second, do not ask what you should know.
There is a series of questions with answers that are or should be important in making any career decision. Also important is the manner in which the questions are received and the answers given. The importance of the same answer to the same question depends entirely upon the institution you are interviewing. In other words, the answer to the same question asked of a large law firm, a corporate legal department, or a very small growing law firm may have many different implications and meanings. The questions listed below are designed for persons expecting to clerk or do additional post graduate education as well as for those seeking permanent employment directly from law school. They are, of course, more immediately relevant to the latter group. Obviously, you will not have an opportunity at the law school to ask all of them; ask the ones in which you are most interested and save the rest for later. In many instances, the purpose of asking the question and the meaning of any answer thereto are obvious; in others there is a discussion of what may be some of the more subtle aspects of a given question and the possible answers to it:
1. What kind of opportunity is there for young people? Does the firm, corporation, or agency expect to grow? How? Where?
The importance of the answer to the first question is obvious. The value of the answers to the second two may be less apparent. If a given institution intends to grow by branching or by expanding a practice area which exceeds the rate by which it increases the number of associates, that answer may give you a hint of the length of your future days and nights. If you sense that growth is being attempted so that the firm can take advantage of a transitory specialty or expertise, be sure you understand what the long-term or strategic planning goals of that institution mean for you and your future.
Make every effort to appreciate and understand the firm's theory of growth. Generally speaking, growth of some kind is essential; it allows the firm to widen the economic base necessary to attract and keep new lawyers and legal business, and it also provides a means through which the firm's practice can be varied, challenged, and improved. Nonetheless, a great many firms lack a strategy for growth which in fact can lead to serious assimilation and economic problems. In other words, be prepared to test the management structure of a given firm, corporation or agency; successful legal institutions will share one characteristic--sound, professional management.
2. How much money will I make in my first year? In my fifth year? In my tenth year?
Most firms will readily discuss, at least in ranges, answers to the first two parts of that question. On the assumption that in ten years you are a partner, a senior counsel, or working elsewhere, firms and corporations may be reluctant to discuss partnership compensation. That should not be the case. Prospective associates have a legitimate interest in compensation, and from the standpoint of many interviewers, an absence of a healthy interest in compensation creates a negative impression about the interviewee. In addition, the question is intended to demonstrate your long-term interest as opposed to seeming concern about only the immediate future. You will find that many interviewers believe most interviewees interview with an attitude of being willing to try a certain position for one or two years and move on if it does not work. Every institution spends a substantial amount in recruiting and training young lawyers; no one wants to waste that effort. Consequently, to the extent you can honestly portray a long-run interest; you will have helped yourself attain a position.
3. What are partnership admission policies? Or, in the case of corporations and governmental agencies, what are the policies with respect to advancement or promotion?
Although it must be raised delicately, the logical final question along this line is "Do such policies provide the rule, or are they the exception to the rule?" In other words, do the stated admission policies or promotional policies differ from those in actual practice? It is critical for you to have an accurate understanding of basic admission or promotion policy. There are many variants of what are relatively few differences in partnership admission policies, at least insofar as larger law firms are concerned. There are a number of firms who make partnership decisions solely on economic grounds. If the income from the practice is not sufficient to justify additional partners, none are made. Most law students can name these firms, or their prototypes, off the tops of their heads. Indeed, there may be some comfort in knowing that there are no policies except for current economics. There is another group of firms which, principally as a competitive matter, are unable to make partnership decisions strictly on economic grounds, but make such decisions on the basis of a combination of the economic considerations and the presence of affirmative reasons to admit a given person to the partnership. Assume a certain associate not only has demonstrated technical excellence, but also has shown an extra dimension in terms of community involvement or business-getting ability. This particular firm will probably admit the associate, but an accurate articulation of the standard used for admission will be quite difficult. Another model for partnership admission is to admit all associates who have achieved certain levels of technical competence so long as they have not made any critical or material mistakes. In other words, it is not necessary in those instances for the associate to have demonstrated something special or to have shown an extra dimension; it is enough to have been a competent lawyer able to contribute (at least in the sense of doing work which may be generated by others) to the economic well-being of the firm.
As you may suspect, the real relevance of the answers to the questions posed above lies in large part in the answer to the question of how partners are compensated. If partners are compensated on the basis of seniority, you have a much different situation than if partners are compensated based on some committee's or individual's subjective perception of each partner's performance in a given year. That distinction is especially meaningful when the answers to the questions discussed in this paragraph are considered in relation to each other. For example, you can readily see what will probably be material differences in compensation between a law firm with a rather generous admission policy and one with a very rigid admission policy even though both firms tend to compensate partners strictly on the basis of seniority. That distinction could also have an impact in overall associate compensation.
On the other hand, two different career situations present themselves if you find two law firms with very generous admission policies, one of which compensates its partners on the basis of subjective performance evaluations and the other on the basis of seniority. In some respects the question can be simplified to "What does it mean to be a partner?" Is partnership designed to attract and hold only the very best lawyers, paying them essentially as equals throughout their careers, or is it de-signed to keep as many lawyers as is reasonably possible and compensate them at different levels based on some evaluation of each lawyer's contribution? Your reaction as to what type of policy you prefer should be tested by asking yourself what type of policy you would prefer as an associate. As a partner?
4. Does the firm have a pro bono practice? Does it have a formal pro bono program in place? Are associates encouraged to participate in the program? How is the work of the associates in such a program evaluated? Is there a limit to the amount of work I can do?
The existence of pro bono programs in law firms and corporations tends to mirror associate interest in such programs. Over the last few years many firms have had a difficult time finding a sufficient number of associates to perform the pro bono work which may come into the office. Nonetheless, a great many firms have formal pro bono programs, in some instances with a quite sophisticated practice. A key to evaluating the real relevance of a pro bono practice in a given firm lies in how the work performed in that program is evaluated. If your pro bono work is evaluated in the same fashion your other work is evaluated, you can be reasonably well assured that the firm takes that part of its practice as seriously as it takes any other. Firms may be reluctant to tell you there is a limit to the amount of pro bono work which you can do. But remember that the practice of law is a business; reasonable attention to pro bono practice and community affairs is desirable for a variety of reasons. Excessive or exclusive attention to them, however, is not in the best long-run interests of the associate or the firm.
5. What are the attrition rates?
Questions with respect to attrition rates often miss the mark. That is particularly true in the instance of corporations with large legal departments and large law firms. The more relevant question in each of those situations is what are the attrition rates, or conversely the admission or promotion rates, for associates or associate counsels in the relevant decision years. In other words, in the case of a large law firm whose partnership admission policies call for evaluation of prospective admission within seven years, it is important to know how many associates in the seventh year became partners; it is not terribly important to know how many of the associates who began with the firm in year one remained to become partners in year seven. Answers to questions of attrition in firms that make partnership decisions principally on the basis of economics are largely irrelevant except insofar as they indicate widespread associate unrest. Moreover, if there is such unrest, you will hear of it before any analysis can be made of the significance of attrition rates.
Another relevant inquiry regarding attrition is where the lawyers who leave find employment? If you see what appears to be a high turnover but that turnover is matched by extraordinary placement, you have a situation different from the one in which people are leaving simply because of working conditions at that particular institution.
All in all, extraordinary turnover may or may not be cause for concern. In this day and age of huge law firms, legal departments, and agency legal staffs, excessive turnover is hard to define. Each succeeding generation of law students is seemingly more mobile and is presented with more opportunities in both legal and non-legal situations. These factors also make it difficult to attach real meaning to the abstract concept of attrition.
6. Am I expected to bill a certain number of hours or dollars? How many hours on the average does each associate work? Is any part of my bonus (if that particular firm or institution offers a bonus) or compensation determined on the basis of hours billed? Or on the basis of bills collected? Are admission or promotion decisions based in part on hours worked? Or on bills collected?
The importance of the answers to these questions is obvious. As an aside, you may find more direct and meaningful answers when this question is asked of associates. In any event, most senior lawyers believe that every prospective associate should be prepared to work hard; the definition of "hard" will depend almost entirely upon the environment. As of the writing of this book, the average associate in major New York and Washington law firms probably bills from 2,000 to 2,500 hours per year. That average number is lower on the west coast and in the southwest. Hours worked in corporate law departments and government agencies tend to be even less, and compensation generally reflects the difference in hours. In view of the profit "squeeze" in many law firms, it is safe to assume there will be no widespread downward pressure on billable hours.
Some law firms actually advance people based in part upon the aggregate number of hours worked. For example, an associate who had billed the firm's average number of hours for an associate over a seven-year-period in a six-year-period might be considered for partner a year earlier than his or her classmates. Of course actions speak louder than words. You will no doubt be more comfortable if there are instances where such advancement has occurred.
The question of hours billed is a critical one. It is critical not so much because it tells you whether or not a given institution is a "sweat-shop" (which you can determine by conversation among your classmates without regard to the specifics of how many hours you are expected to bill), but because you have to know the rules of the game, what is expected of you, if you are to succeed in any environment, including a law firm environment.
The answer to the question about collections is equally important. If you are responsible for collections, it puts additional, but perhaps justified (at least in later years) pressure on you.
7. What is the firm's view of political and civic involvement?
Almost every law firm will encourage its associates to be active in the community. That activity can take several forms. For example, one might be active in church or religious life, political campaigns, or with specific charitable or other benevolent endeavors. It is important to understand the firm's commitment to the community so that you have a sense of what might or might not be expected of you over the course of your years of practice, including those as a partner.
Many firms would relish an interest shown by their associates in activities outside the firm. Those activities often result in relationships which, in turn, result in continued business or in the acquisition of new clients. In addition, the activities of lawyers in the community help promote the general image of the firm. Nonetheless, outside activities can undermine ultimate success if they take too much time away from the legitimate demands of the office. There are situations in which certain kinds of political and social involvements may not turn out to be career enhancing. Although experience shows the instances of such activity to be the exception rather than the rule, no doubt there are firms whose management is not enthralled about the prospect of an associate working on a political campaign for candidates (or a controversial ballot proposition) whose interests might be deemed not in the best interests of the firm or its clients. Clients have unpredictable reactions to "members of their law firm" being actively involved in an effort perceived by the client to be against the client's best interest. In any event, it behooves every prospective kingmaker or candidate to understand the political background of his or her particular law firm. Obviously, the best of all worlds is complete balance where there are partners involved in both Republican and Democratic campaigns, in Christian and Jewish religious and charitable activities, and in conservative and liberal social and political causes. Firms with that political, social and economical mix are not common, but they do exist.
8. How is the firm governed? Do associates, or for that matter younger partners, have a meaningful voice in the management of the firm?
Again, the answers given in this question will reveal quite a bit about the firm you are considering. If the firm is essentially managed or administered by a single or a relatively few number of partners, you will have a totally different environment than you will have in a firm which is truly democratic. There are firms where important matters are actually submitted to a vote of the partners. Before you necessarily conclude that form of government is best, remember that there is a real need, particularly in larger institutions, for management, efficient operation, direction, and strategic planning. The presence of these management skills does not necessarily mean that all sense of interpersonal relationship and democracy disappears; the existence of sound management and efficient operation may simply mean a more profitable and harmonious working environment. On the other hand, a highly centralized management system may penalize those who hold or express views for the future of the firm contrary to those of existing management. Again, the answers to these questions simply provide additional information to help you interview and evaluate a particular institution more successfully.
In analyzing answers to other questions, the concepts of strategic planning and professional management have been mentioned. As noted, the existence of these characteristics is crucial to the future progress of a firm, corporation or agency. In most cases, you will have more of an opportunity to discuss these issues when you visit the institution. Take advantage of the opportunity.
One of the key questions with respect to firm government is who chooses management's successors? You will find a surprising number of situations in which members of the management committee or executive committee (or whatever name happens to be appended to the governing body of the firm that interests you) simply sit down and among themselves select their successors. Although you may find it hard to believe, in many instances they select themselves. Moreover, there are a number of situations in which they are the best choices. That process may work perfectly well, but it does not provide the same opportunity for promotion of those with different viewpoints. On the other hand, a method of succession based generally on seniority may be substantially less disruptive than holding distasteful elections or referendums among partners on a yearly or biannual basis.
Another question with respect to management is what role is played by associates and younger partners. In many firms you will find associates taking prominent roles in recruiting and even in the evaluation of other associates. Although that might be an extreme, many firms find ways for associates to become involved in the management and direction of the law firm, all on the quite correct assumption that it is their future and, as a result, they ought to be interested in it. This question leads quite logically to the next.
9. What does a partnership mean? Are there tiers of partnership? Or junior and senior partners? This question, and the analysis of it, should be read with questions and analyses numbers 3 and 8.
These questions are obviously tied to partnership admission policies and firm management or governance. It also has quite an obvious economic impact on your career. Many firms recruit associates on the basis that, if they stay and perform as the firm expects them to perform, they will be admitted to partnership without regard to the number of associates remaining in their class at the time admission is considered. Firms that adopt this posture tend more often than not to be located in the west and southwest. As a general rule, firms on the eastern seaboard recruit law students with substantially fewer promises about partnership admission. It is not uncommon for large firms in the east to adopt as an admission policy, even though it may not be stated explicitly, a position that the question of admission is one which they will consider when, as, and if appropriate, but totally within their discretion. A firm with that type of admission policy bespeaks a substantially different environment, particularly for an associate, from that of the firm first described. On the other hand, the policy at the latter firm may result in a substantial difference in the way partners are treated and feel about themselves and their partners. In other words, a more generous liberal admission policy can, although it need not, result in the admission of a sufficient number of additional partners which dilutes the average partner's earnings to a substantially greater extent than the admission of partners to a firm that maintains a very rigid and perhaps even arbitrary and capricious admission policy. In the latter instance, you are apt to find fewer partners, a higher associate-partner ratio, and a greater average partner income.
If you find a firm which has either a de jure or de facto policy of a partnership comprised of partners treated differently within the same class, that has certain implications with respect to partner income and a sense of harmony among the partners. While it may seem obvious that no group of people will progress and grow at exactly the same rate, many law firms make just that assumption and pay all partners in a given class the same throughout their careers. To the extent the partnership is profitable and each of the partners is comfortable with his or her income level, that type of arrangement is ideal. In the un-fortunate event that the profitability of the partnership varies from year to year, that kind of arrangement can cause resentment on the part of the partners who perceive themselves to be contributing to a greater extent. It can also cause a substantial frustration among those who will acknowledge that their contribution is not as great as some of their peers.
In any event, it is generally acknowledged that a "jump-ball" partnership compensation arrangement is probably to be avoided. Yearly meetings at which partners argue among themselves about who should receive what without any institutional guidelines as to advancement tend to be disruptive, encourage partner turnover, and enhance the probability of firm split-offs. Some may argue that such matters are premature for law student consideration. This relevance, however, becomes apparent when you realize that you may be a partner in a firm five times longer than you will be an associate.
10. What do associates do?
The ideal way to ask this question is to ask more than one of the associates with whom you visit what they do and what they expect to be doing in the future. Of course it is difficult to ask questions of people who are not likely to be present, at least in significant numbers, in the law school interview. If an associate is conducting the interview, and that will occur in a surprising number of instances, be sure you pursue the matter. If a partner is the interviewer, do not be put off. It is the job of the interviewer to anticipate questions and have the answers; one might reasonably assume one would be interested in what he or she might be doing. Consequently, you should feel free to address the issue. You might also learn something about the depth of knowledge the interviewer has about what young lawyers in the office actually do!
If you are someone who expects to use your early years of practice to become as technically proficient as possible, you may prefer a firm where the associates are given assignments which are more technically oriented. If your passion is for client involvement or court room activity, you will prefer firms that provide the maximum practical amount of responsibility at the earliest possible time. If you are one whose inclination is to seek early courtroom experience, client contact, or the like, in preference over a fundamental, technical education, you should be certain that practice opportunities allowing you to grow and progress to more interesting matters are present. A significant number of firms do indeed provide early opportunities but do not, in turn, have the ability to attract and keep the kinds of clients and cases that will result in interesting matters over the course of your practice as an associate and as a partner. If you are interviewing a firm which is touting early courtroom experience and the like, be sure your interviewing concerns are not myopic.
11. What do younger partners do?
The answer to this question is important in that it indicates the process of evolution through a particular firm's practice. Generally speaking, younger partners should be carrying a heavy practice and administrative responsibility. Through their efforts much of the business of the firm gets accomplished. The senior associates and younger partners are the true economic backbone of any firm in that they are at experience levels that justify their being responsible for almost any matter and, at least in most instances, they are not compensated at levels to which they hope to become accustomed in the future. Younger partners should also be enthusiastic about the future of the firm and their role in it although there are certain periods immediately or shortly after one is admitted to partnership when a certain feeling of "what's next?" or "now what?" sets in. To understand a partner's attitude toward his or her work, you really need to know how long a given lawyer has been a partner. All you need to do is ask.
12. How will I be reviewed, how often, how candidly? Are compensation and partnership admission issues treated together?
As noted above, a significant number of law firms make no pretense about the admission process. That is, they reserve the exclusive right in their discretion to make partnership decisions. The review process in institutions of that sort is substantially less important than in institutions that purport to admit all qualified associates regardless of the number in a given class. In the latter instance, that process is critical.
Firms vary in their practice with respect to review, some conducting reviews every six months and others substantially more frequently. Of course, the best review process would be to go over each project as it is finished, although no matter how good any firm or the partners' intentions may be, that frequency of review simply is unrealistic. Semiannual review for firms with a substantial number of associates if done properly is a significant time commitment on the part of the partners. Review any less frequently probably does not provide an associate with a true indication of his or her progress, particularly if that associate is being reviewed for partnership admission purposes.
13. How will I be reviewed?
The degree of candor in a review is particularly important with firms that purport to conduct reviews for admission purposes. Most such firms are willing and able to recognize associates on either extreme; they are both willing to admit that a particular person is not advancing at a rate equal to that of his or her classmates and eager to find and applaud the "Whizzer White" in a particular law school class. The review process is important for people who fall into both of those categories, but it is even more important to the vast bulk of us who continue to try and who proceed at varying degrees. In those instances the review process becomes horribly complicated and at times terribly frustrating. You will find yourself asking a series of questions, many of them as seemingly important as any you have ever asked. How to interpret your review is beyond the scope of this manual; the important aspect of this particular issue, though, is to try and determine the degree of candor present in the review process.
Most firms use the review process to indicate compensation changes for the succeeding year. As noted, it is always helpful to know whether or not compensation and partnership admission are tied together. You need to know, in other words, if receiving the highest bonus in your class in a given year means that you might reasonably expect to be on track for partnership or is simply an indication of appreciation for a 4000 billable-hour year.
14. Will I be considered for partner? If I am passed over in that year or at that period, is that it? In other words, is it up or out?
Every firm has an average number of years after which they consider associates for partnership. Those range from three to five years in smaller firms, to seven and a half years in firms in the western and southwestern United States, to eight, ten or more years in eastern law firms. The answer is important only to the extent that you need to know the rules. In some firms if you are not admitted at the "proper" time, your chances of admission are reduced materially. Indeed, in many instances, you are encouraged and helped to find other employment. A number of law firms, however, may not necessarily attach such a magical impact to the passing of a particular month. Oddly enough, in most instances the firms with substantial flexibility in the later associate years tend to be those who make no front end promises with respect to admission.
Two relevant questions along this line are "What happens if I do not make it?" and "Is any effort made to find me a job or help me locate a position?" Even though these are quite responsible and reasonable questions, many interviewers will interpret them as an indication of your lack of self-confidence. Nonetheless, you should devote some attention to finding out how a given firm looks after people who have not been admitted to partnership. One way to do this is to ask where people go when they leave the firm in the later associate years.
15. What are you looking for in an associate? What are my chances of being hired?
These perfectly legitimate questions should give you an in-sight in to how you fit a particular firm's notion of what it wants in an associate and what the percentages of your being hired are. A variant of this question might be "How many law students are invited to visit the firm and how many of them receive offers?"
Bear in mind that an offer given at the law school is likely to be only an offer to participate in further interviews. Nonetheless, you should understand the nature of any offer that may be given at the end of your interview period whenever that is. You should also try to understand the process by which offers of actual permanent (or summer) employment are given.
Most firms wait until you have returned to law school to make an offer of employment although a few try to decide while you are visiting and make an offer at the end of the interview period. Both of those methods create somewhat different tensions and pressures during the interview process. In order to be able to deal with such tensions and pressures, you ought to understand what will happen in any particular instance.
If you have received an offer of employment, you will want to know how long you have to decide whether or not to accept it and in what form the acceptance must be made. You may also want to know whether or not the offer will remain open through clerkships, internships and the like.
16. If I accept the offer, will I be allowed to have a voice in choosing the kind of work I do?
Many firms arbitrarily assign new associates to particular practice areas or specialties. Others have elaborate rotation processes through which associates pass in an effort to allow them to see the law firm and pick or have a voice in picking the department or practice specialty they prefer. Obviously, if you are terribly uncomfortable with a given discipline, you may want to avoid firms which could arbitrarily assign you to that practice area. Very few firms would assign someone to an area that he or she truly disliked; doing so is simply not in the firm's best interest. On the other hand, some firms will allow an associate to pick whatever department he or she wants when such a choice may not be in the firm's best interest. Those firms have decided that lawyers who are happy and comfortable with their work will eventually make the law firm more successful than lawyers who are assigned practice in areas that may be their second and third choices.
Related to the rotation or department selection process is the question of how work is conducted once you are in a department. If you are expected to work for a particular partner or with a team of lawyers for a significant number of years, that expectation poses a different set of considerations than if you are simply expected to work for a representative number of people in a given department. Although most firms will make sincere efforts to alleviate aggravated personal or practice situations, there are risks inherent in the one partner or small group assignments that are not present in a more general practice effort.
If you are interested in a firm that has a very loose or non-existent departmental structure, the questions must be varied to accommodate the situation. You will be substantially more interested in how work assignments are made, what the probabilities that you will receive one or more different kinds of work are, and what the practice mix of the firm or group of lawyers within the firm is.
17. What kind of social or community service obligations will I have? Are you expected to entertain to a significant extent, and if so, are those expenses reimbursable? Are you expected to join a particular club or specific civic organizations, and again, are those expenses reimbursable?
Even if there are no stated obligations, a reasonable amount of social and community involvement is likely to be personally rewarding and career enhancing. Partners in law firms and general counsels of corporations and agencies are more likely to see potential in lawyers who have some outside interests or extra dimensions.
18. Am I expected to bring in new business? If I am, am I paid for it? If so, how?
If you are expected to bring in business, you should evaluate your ability and willingness to do so. Many people are more comfortable with the technical aspects of the practice; such people are bound to be disappointed in a situation in which their advancement is directly dependent on their ability to attract, and eventually to hold, new business. Even if you are not expected to help develop the practice in your early associate years, you should try and determine when, if ever, such demands will be made and what the firm's expectations might be. As with many of the questions discussed in this chapter, the purpose of the questions discussed in this section is to help you get a better sense of a particular firm.
