Hammonds’ clients to grill wannabe lawyers

  • Print
  • Comments (8)

Readers' comments (8)

  • Not a good sign for the firm on the deferrals given that many other firms are ending them prematurely or recruiting extra trainees.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This is a good move, of far more practical and relevant use to the candidate and recruiting law firm. However, I hope that the client panel are made well aware of the relevant maturity, background and experience of each candidate. For example; to expect a 20-year-old, especially from a less privileged background, to be able to “walk the walk and talk the talk” which the panel are accustomed to would be unfair on said candidate.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Sound as if they did not trust their own judgement. As a client, I would be quite irritated.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I disagree with anonymous. Perhaps this is a smart move on the part of the firm? If I was a key client of a firm (and perhaps spending hundreds of thousands in legal fees) I would appreciate being considered. After all, they are hardly being forced to take part!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It is a brilliant idea. Both have a common interest to get lawyers who can relate to client's requirements!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I agree with Anonymous. It seems like a gimmick good for some press coverage but likely to be quietly dropped soon after. Larger clients will be using multiple law firms - how many interviews would their GCs be asked to do if this caught on?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • i believe this to be a good idea in theory as it would give the candedates a more realistic veiw of meeting and conversing with the clients as well as the client being able to decide what right for them

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • An interesting move by Hammonds given their graduate recruitment team's dislike of outside interference - a fear of previous client-facing experience outside a law firm, and disdain for partner recommendations for candidates who have actually working with them for a period. Maybe some people are tired of academically certified but commercially-naive trainees?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (8)