Basically, they rated me on four different criteria: Energy, Achievement Drive, Initiative and Persistence, and Persuasiveness. Here's the breakdown and a brief summary:
Energy: 9Can't argue with that. A little bit of pressure would definitely alleviate the ridiculous boredom that is the practice of law. Maybe, if someone could shoot at me while I'm working, this paperwork wouldn't be so tedious.
Candidate works quickly, manages time efficiently and excels under pressure.
Achievement Drive: 10Yeah, I might be a wee bit competitive.
Candidate likes to set high goals, measures himself against those goals and works best in situations where there is a clear "winner."
Initiative and Persistence: 8The first two are definitely true, but I'm not sure about the rejection part. I'm getting rejected A LOT and it is absolutely crushing my spirit. Maybe I'd cope better with smaller doses of rejection.
Candidate has a strong commitment to getting things done, pushes himself to the limits of his ability and bounces back easily from rejection.
Persuasiveness: 2Unfortunately, that's me. In general, there are two ways of doing things - my way and the wrong way. The thing is, I have no problem if you want to do things the wrong way. That's your problem, not mine.
Candidate has difficulty convincing others, doesn't put much effort into convincing others and reacts poorly to constructive criticism.
Overall: 8Fuck.
Candidate will have above average production and desire to succeed, but a below average chance of staying with the company during the first year.
Lol, too funny. Describes me too except for the achievement drive. Good luck with your job search!
ReplyDeleteYour persuasiveness score says a lot. Maybe law is not for you.
ReplyDeleteLitigation certainly isn't. But, I've known that for a while now.
ReplyDeleteDespite your admission that litigation isn't for you, I'm still not persuaded that law is the right career for someone who scores so low in persuasiveness. Sounds like the people who convince themselves that they will be great lawyers despite scoring 141 on the LSAT. "Those skills are meaningless in the kind of law I want to practice!"
ReplyDeleteI agree with 1:54. Every type of law requires some level of persuasion, even transactional law. Also, I thought the above questionnaire is hilarious. I'm still a little uncertain on how a potential employer can gain so much information off of a single set of questions.
ReplyDeleteOn a serious note, though, I think the ability to take constructive criticism is extremely important for a young attorney because you don't know shit. And most new attorneys are horrible at it. They come out of law school thinking they are a few years away from an appointment to the federal bench, when in reality, most will turn out to be mediocre attorneys at best. Frankly, it's the number reason why I don't look to hire new attorneys -- new attorneys are impossible to train.
To give an example, we hired a new employee over a year ago. She thinks she has the highest intellect in the world and has the condescending attitude to match. Whenever I try to mentor her (I have a few years experience and have had some success in my career), she looks at me like I'm stupid. Sure enough, she screwed up some serious stuff over the course of the past year, and we are now beginning to seriously think about replacing her. She would have been fired long ago, but unfortunately, she has some SERIOUS connections. And in the end, those probably won't save her job. If only she knew how to listen.
At least you got a rejection letter. Most of my applications probably get tossed right after the hiring person sees J.D. at the top. I never hear back when I send out my resume. I finally got a non-law job since I hated being an attorney, but I think it's going to be years before I can take that blasted degree off my resume! I hope you find something soon.
ReplyDelete