We try to do a reasonably careful job of critically reviewing the accuracy of candidate resumes. Occasionally, we catch a major deception (like a COO candidate who claimed to have attended Princeton Law School). But typically the deceptions involve resume inconsistencies, gaps in employment and exaggerations. Two recent articles in financial newspapers discussed resume accuracy with the American published Wall Street Journal taking a hard line and advising absolute honesty. The UK’s Financial Times took a bit more flexible view based on the likelihood of getting caught.
The fact is that we expect a bit of puffery in the manner in which candidates present themselves but expect that there be no factual errors. Here are the top five “red flags” that lead us to question the accuracy of a resume:
Employment history shown by year, especially if there is a history of frequent job changes. This often permits large gaps to be disguised (2007-2008 could be one day or 23 months).
Vaguery in description of academic work (“I did my MBA work at Harvard from 2000 to 2003.”).
Experience and accomplishments that seem beyond the normal responsibilities of a position or the experience of a candidate.
Inconsistent information (lengthy description of one job and little information on another).
Unnecessary information about employers or supervisors.
Interview Scheduling
A recent study of job interviews shows that candidates interviewing between 9am and 11am have the greatest likelihood of being hired. The worst time is 3pm or after. Any day other than Monday or Friday is equally good. Friday is seen as the kiss of death. Most importantly, candidates should spend some time “warming up” in the washroom – even to the point of doing some vocal exercises – before going into the interview. Most interviewers make a hire/no hire decision during the first ten minutes of the interview.
Apprenticeship Programs With the growing reluctance of clients to pay for summer associate billable hours, especially when New York firms are charging upwards of $250 per hour for law students, Apprenticeship Programs for new lawyers seems to be attracting a lot of interest. Thus far the primary leaders are those that have established programs to hire associates at a lower compensation level but demand fewer billable hours and greater opportunities to learn by observing and participating in client engagements. For example, Howrey runs a two-year program which demands only 700 billable hours during the first year and 1000 the second. Associates split their time among billable hours, handling pro bono cases and attending training sessions during the first year. The second year includes a secondment with a client. The salary is $125,000 the first year and $150,000 the second. Drinker Biddle, Frost Brown Todd, Ford & Harrison and Strasburger & Price run similar but more scaled-down programs.
The UK Experience
Apprenticeships, of course, are nothing new in places like Canada and the UK where new law school graduates must participate in one- or two-year hands on training programs before they are admitted to practice. We thought it would be interesting to see how the British legal community feels about the recent U.S. movement in this area. The following is a recent post from a UK associate blog:
Training Contracts, US - Style
Training in the US is a bit different, as far as I understand. Law is a post-grad pursuit and takes three years. And mind-blowing levels of debt. But you emerge from your alma mater after those three years of academic frat boy posturing a fully-qualified lawyer. You can rock up at a firm and put yourself forward as an attorney on day one. As much as the LPC may well be a pile of pish, at least we pay lip service to the concept of vocational training. The only real experience a US law school grad will have had - and it's only true if you're a top student - is a spell as a summer associate. That is literally what it sounds like. At my old firm - a US practice in London - we had these fresh-faced and white-toothed Americans over every summer. They got taken out for lunch and dinner and drinks. They had to do fairly normal work - much better stuff than you'd ever get on a vacation scheme. And, what's more, they got paid the same as a NQ (and, astonishingly, their time is occasionally billed to clients - although there's been moves against this recently).
General point - bitterness over the salary aside - is how can you expect boys and girls fresh out of law school to be lawyers? The exact same is true of new trainees, but at least UK firms accept that it's going to take another two years on the job before their young bucks are worth anything. And even at NQ level, there's still a long way to go. American exceptionalism aside, there appear to be tentative moves emerging in the US market that, for once, we've got it right. Howrey is the largest of the firms currently running what has been termed "apprenticeship programs". There are lingering fears that the lower salaries that these apprentices are paid will make the firms less attractive. But can it be the case that in US, the job market is still in the buyer's favour (or even favor)? And there are the usual worries that having to do training will take away from the partners' billables. Which is true - look how much it costs to take a trainee through a TC nowadays.
Either way, we're holding the lead this time, and they're the bichon frize. Any thoughts?
Legal Market Job Losses
May represented the first monthly gain in legal industry jobs during the past year. The sector gained 300 jobs (at both professional and staff levels) in May after having lost 700 jobs in April and 22,200 over the past 12 months.
Outsourced Legal Work
During the boom years of 2006-2008, a number of law firms talked about outsourcing corporate transactional work to places where they could find highly qualified and experienced corporate lawyers at lower salary rates. A number of mid-western law firms even attempted to position themselves as “best friend” or acquisition targets for New York corporate firms. The concept died with the recession.
Now, in the UK, Magic Circle firm Freshfields has announced that it is in talks with several large UK firms outside of London to establish a formal deal network in anticipation of an upturn in deal volume. Another large UK firm, Eversheds, is using lawyers in South Africa for corporate and IP work, and several smaller London firms are sending British legal work for British clients to New Zealand law firms. The concept is that these non-London firms should be able to do a good job and still turn a profit. What seems to be uncertain is the degree to which the savings is passed on to the clients or whether the client is charged London rates.
Dress Codes
With summer comes the annual attempt by law firms to maintain a business atmosphere while presenting a relaxed work atmosphere. The latest firm to get roasted for a dress code in the U.S. is Weil Gotshal in New York which created a list of acceptable and unacceptable clothing guidelines. Unacceptable for women are: denim clothing of any kind, jeans of any color, cargo pants/carpenter pants, leggings, sweat or exercise clothing, shorts or miniskirts, bareback dresses, low-cut V-necks, halter tops, spaghetti strap shirts, tank tops, T-shirts, flannel shirts, athletic shoes, clogs, beach shoes, flip flops and hiking boots. For men the unacceptable list includes most of the same things as women but adds collarless or sleeveless shirts, short-sleeved shirts (except during May – September), shirttails outside of pants, turtlenecks, shoes without socks, and deck shoes.
On the other side of the pond, one of the cultural impacts of the Hogan & Hartson/Lovells merger is Lovell’s London office’s first dress down Friday. Their new dress policy reads: “Don’t wear clothes that are provocative, too short, too sheer, too revealing or too tight.”
LegalTrends
LegalTrendsis a semi-monthly newsletter written and edited by Ed Wesemann, a Founding Partner of Legal Resource Group. Ed is also a management consultant and advisor to US and International law firms. In addition to being the author of LegalTrends, he also pens articles for EdWesemann.com that is emailed to thousands of subscribers around the world. In addition, he has written four books on legal management issues. For further information visit the Legal Resources Group website at www.LRGLLC.com or Ed's personal website at www.edweseman.com. He can also be reached at 1-912-598-2040 or by email at Ed@edwesemann.com
Legal Resource Group, LLC
Legal Resource Group, LLC specializes in serving the Executive and Administrative recruiting needs of law firms. We maintain the largest data base of law firm Executive and Administrative staff in the world. This allows us to immediately identify the very best candidates. We find the best people, complete searches faster and have extremely reasonable fees. Simply-- Our Reputation Speaks For Itself.
For further information, visit our website at www.LRGLLC.com , contact us by e-mail at
