Irwin Mitchell (x2)
Irwin Mitchell direct training contract – February 2025
What was the full recruitment process?
1. Application
2. Online test and video interview
3. Virtual assessment centre
4. Final insight day and interview
Which aspect does this report cover?
Assessment centre
Where did the assessment centre take place?
Cappfinity Platform
What did the assessment centre involve?
- Group exercise: discussed the risks and opportunities of using generative AI in recruitment (~20-minute discussion + 5-minute oral presentation to two senior associates).
- Written exercise: drafted an email to a partner advising on a meeting with a client recently diagnosed with ADHD.
- Strength-based interview: covered strengths, motivations, and core values (~1 hour with a senior director and the legal director for personal injury services).
Group exercise
The exercise focused on the use of generative AI in recruitment. I was paired with two other candidates and two assessors from the firm. The discussion was guided by three sub-questions displayed on-screen, covering:
- Should the firm adopt AI-driven recruitment processes?
- How should this decision be communicated to internal and external stakeholders?
- What potential risks could arise from using AI in recruitment?
Each participant was encouraged to contribute, and the assessors observed our ability to engage in constructive discussion, listen actively, and provide reasoned arguments. After 20 minutes of discussion, we gave a 5-minute oral presentation summarising our key points. The presentation required us to be concise and persuasive while addressing all relevant issues discussed.
Following this, each candidate was asked two strengths-based questions. One of my questions was about reflecting on my communication style and approach during the discussion, while another focused on how I balanced listening and contributing my own points.
Written exercise
Each exercise was accessed through a link on the Cappfinity platform at the scheduled time. The written exercise involved responding to an email from a partner. The task required advising on the approach for an initial meeting with a longstanding Irwin Mitchell client recently diagnosed with ADHD. Since I applied for the personal legal services stream, my response had to be more client-focused and empathetic.
The email required a clear structure and professional tone, ensuring that the client's needs were prioritised. A well-structured response was essential. I included an executive summary at the beginning outlining the key points, followed by detailed explanations using subheadings for clarity. Considerations included ensuring accessibility for the client, understanding their specific legal needs, and demonstrating sensitivity in communication.
Strength-based interview
This interview lasted an hour and covered my strengths, motivations, and core values. Most questions were scenario-based, assessing my decision-making and problem-solving in a work environment. The interviewers also observed how I approached challenges, communicated effectively, and adapted to different situations. Two questions focused on my understanding of the firm, and the final two explored my core values. I was also given the opportunity to ask two questions at the end.
Some of the questions I was asked included:
- What stands out to you about Irwin Mitchell?
- How would you prioritise a list of tasks at the start of your day?
- How would you grow and develop at the firm?
- Name a time when you failed at something or overcome an obstacle.
- What top three core values would you bring to the firm?
- How would you handle a situation where a colleague was repeatedly failing to pull their weight?
- How would you deal with being removed from a project you had worked on for a long time?
To prepare, I recommend having well-structured answers for your motivations to join Irwin Mitchell and common strength-based questions. The assessors were looking for candidates who could provide thoughtful, structured responses rather than rehearsed scripts. They also valued adaptability and problem-solving skills, so it was important to approach each scenario logically and practically. If you find yourself stuck, answering truthfully and logically is the best approach.
What was the outcome?
I was informed that I would be contacted within six weeks regarding whether I would progress to the final stage of the training contract process, which consists of an insight day and a final interview.
Do you have any specific advice on how to prepare?
To ensure I was well-prepared, I created a Word document summarising my firm research, focusing only on the points that made Irwin Mitchell unique to me. This helped me tailor my responses in the interview and group exercise.
For the written exercise and group exercise, I used the Commercial Law Academy modules to gain insights into best practices. These resources helped refine my approach to structuring responses concisely and ensuring my contributions were impactful in group discussions.
Additionally, I compiled a list of trending legal topics that could potentially arise in the assessment centre and prepared concise discussion points on each. This ensured I was ready to engage in commercial discussions with confidence.
To refine my case study approach, I asked AI to generate hypothetical case studies and then practiced responding to them under timed conditions. This method helped me manage my time effectively during the written and oral elements of the assessment centre.
Irwin Mitchell Training Contract - March 2024
What was the full recruitment process?
1. Application
2. Online assessment
3. Pre-recorded video interview
4. Assessment centre (virtual)
5. Final interview (this is in person)
Which aspect does this report cover?
Video interview and virtual assessment centre
Pre-recorded video interview
The video interview was quite short, and mainly focused on predictable questions such as “how does the firm stand out to you”, and “why would you be a good fit?”. However, I would expect a question or two that you can’t really prepare for – they’re not trying to catch you out, but just seeing how you respond to something that you can’t write a script for in advance. Sometimes the questions had two parts to them; if this happens, make sure you address both parts.
I think I had only 30 seconds to prepare my answer to each question, then 1 minute to record my answer (with no option to re-record) – so definitely watch the clock.
Questions I was asked included:
- Why is it important to consult with a diverse range of stakeholders?
- How would you adapt your communication style in different situations?
- Why do you want to work at Irwin Mitchell?
- Why would you be a good fit at the firm?
I was informed by email more than 2 months after the video interview that I had progressed to the assessment centre stage.
Where did the assessment centre take place?
Online, via a platform called Cappfinity
What did the assessment centre involve?
1. Interview: scenario-based and motivation questions (~40 minutes with an associate and the partner who was head of hiring)
2. Group task: discussion of a current topic and short presentation / Q&A (~30 minutes with a partner and a member of HR)
3. Written exercise: email to a fictional partner (~30 minutes)
Interview
The interview was quite informal, as the two fee earners were really friendly. It wasn’t competency-based (e.g. “tell me about a time when…”); instead, it was based more on hypothetical scenarios, for example:
- “How would you respond if….”
- “Why is planning important?”
- “How would you adapt to a new seat?”
- “How would you feel if you didn’t get your preferred seat choice?”
I was also asked “what interests you about our work?”. Most questions were followed-up with something like “what makes you say that?”.
The interviewers didn’t tend to ask ‘typical’ legal interview questions, so my advice would be to ensure you’re answering the specific question asked (rather than what you might have expected them to ask). Also, try hard to tie your experiences to your answers; the questions may not naturally lead themselves to discussing these, but it can be very beneficial if you give examples to back up what you’re saying. Also definitely ask questions at the end!
Group task
I was paired with two other candidates, and we were told to discuss a current topic. We were allocated the topic of artificial intelligence, and had to discuss the opportunities, the risks, the commercial implications, whether and how the firm should adopt it, and if so, how it should adopt it and how this should be communicated to the rest of the firm. Note that we weren’t given any background materials; we weren’t told we couldn’t use the internet for research, but there wasn’t really time to do this, so we just thought of ideas on the spot.
We then orally presented our recommendations to the assessors, with each of us covering one aspect of the brief. We were in control of how much time we allocated to this – we allocated around 8 minutes. Finally, we were each asked two questions building on this (we each faced different questions). My advice would be to try and tie your answers to specific aspects of the firm, and to be supportive of the other candidates throughout. (~30 mins)
Written exercise
I was given information and prompts via a platform called Cappfinity, and tasked with writing an email to a fictional partner ahead of my first meeting with them. My exercise wasn’t to do with law; it focused on my personal development during the training contract and what I saw as my strengths, areas for development, and plans for success and improvement throughout. My advice would be to try and show some originality, act like it’s a real task, and structure it well.
What was the outcome?
I hadn’t heard back at the time of writing. I was told I would hear within ~6 weeks whether I would be invited back for the final interview. I received a feedback report soon after the assessment centre stating two personal areas of strength and 1 area for improvement.