When applying for a legal role, candidates usually provide resumes, cover letters, references and writing samples. However, increasingly, prospective employers are requesting that job candidates also complete pre-employment projects. This trend, common in sectors such as finance, is met with mixed opinions within the legal industry.
These pre-employment projects usually require candidates to edit orientated documents such as shareholders’ agreements or license agreements. Other times candidates might be asked to critically review a document within a short timeframe, either during the interview or soon after.
Despite these tasks being perceived as essential filters to differentiate the good candidates from the average, there are objections to their effectiveness and merit. Notably, the commitment required to fulfill these take-home tasks is often overwhelming, as it is near impossible to regulate the time spent on them, and candidates are inclined to invest many hours in their endeavor to impress potential employers. Nevertheless, such efforts may not accurately reflect a candidate’s suitability or potential performance within a real-world, time-sensitive work scenario. Similarly, having to perform a high-pressure task within the confines of an interview may not provide the candidate with an opportunity to fully comprehend the issues and develop a comprehensive response.
Additionally, it has been argued that the requirement for pre-employment projects may even tap on ego-centric tendencies on the employers’ part. Considering the broad and impersonal approach many job seekers take — casting their nets far and wide to secure numerous potential employment options — the time-consuming nature of these projects could make it harder for candidates to explore multiple prospects.
There are other, less demanding and potentially more effective mechanisms for assessing a candidate’s aptitude. Submissions of writing samples can be useful; a public filing document can be shared in its entirety and used to appraise a lawyer’s ability to handle real legal matters. Using the interview in itself as a tool for evaluation by highly skilled interviewers can also assess a potential lawyer’s understanding of legal issues directly related to a given area of expertise.
The article, written by Jordan Rothman, a partner at The Rothman Law Firm, for Above The Law, argues that such pre-employment projects largely act as excessive hindrances rather than useful evaluative tools within the legal industry. Rothman suggests that hiring managers should be capable of evaluating a lawyer’s abilities through techniques such as interviews and writing samples, thereby negating the need for pre-employment projects.