When it comes to training, most firms have at least one distinguishing feature, for example shorter rotations between teams, better international secondment opportunities (or even guaranteed secondment opportunities), specialist learning and development programmes, smaller trainee intakes, and the like. To give some examples…

Structure of the training

Does the firm’s training programme enable you to experience a broader range of departments than its competitors’ training programmes, for example by allowing shorter rotations between departments? Or does the firm offer seats across a greater variety of teams? Alternatively, does the firm guarantee you a seat in the practice area that most interests you? Note that firms have different policies regarding "mandatory" seats. Some firms might require all trainees to spend at least one seat in a specific team - often corporate, finance or disputes - whereas others might designate two or three mandatory seats (or require you to choose two out of three options). 

Explain why you care

If a firm’s approach is distinctively flexible (or offers more variety), does this mean you’ll be able to experience a greater range of work? If so, will this increase your chances of identifying the type of work that best aligns with your skills and interests, and help you to make a more informed decision about where to qualify or specialise post-training? Could experiencing more areas also give you a uniquely holistic insight into how various aspects of matters fit together, and in doing so, further your commercial awareness and broader professional development?

Whether you see mandatory seats as a pro or a con will depend somewhat on whether your interests align with the designated practice area(s). If they do, then explain this. You might feel that one mandatory seat constitutes a selling point, as it strikes a balance between flexibility and guaranteeing your exposure to a specific team (provided you're actually interested in that team). You could even refer to a "mandatory" seat as a "guaranteed" seat, as this puts a more positive spin on the requirement.

Approach to training

Is the firm more focused on classroom-based learning at the start, or does it prefer to give juniors practical, client-facing experience from the outset? Are you afforded greater opportunities to develop your technical and business knowledge and/or professional skills during your training? For example, are you applying to a law firm that offers not only the usual legal training, but also runs some kind of academy that provides opportunities to develop business knowledge (e.g. through attending client-led seminars) and soft skills (e.g. through expert-led workshops)? Alternatively, are employees encouraged to get involved in business development initiatives or to bring in work? Or does the firm offer grants to help you pay for language courses or additional qualifications, for example an MBA?

Explain why you care

If you are attracted to a firm because it promises practical experience and ample exposure to clients, then explain why this matters, perhaps linking back to experiences where you have enjoyed (and thrived while) learning by doing. Could a more holistic approach to training – one that creates opportunities to develop not just the technical knowledge you need as a junior, but also broader business and professional skills – potentially help you to emerge as a more well-rounded professional? If so, will this better prepare you for a more senior role?

Support and supervision

What kind of supervision and support are you provided throughout? Do you have dedicated mentors (perhaps at various levels of seniority), regular supervisor catch ups and frequent appraisals? Are there regular technical training sessions within each team, as well as frequent trainee-specific seminars? What about e-learning resources that you can access on demand? Has the firm brought in particular measures more recently to support employees in light of changes to the working environment (e.g. initiatives designed to mitigate potentially negative impacts of remote working)?

Explain why you care

Does the firm’s approach to developing its employees align with your preferred means of learning and developing? If so, perhaps explain how you discovered that this approach works best for you. If you will be allocated buddies or mentors at varying levels of seniority, could this enable you to learn from and build relationships with a broad range of professionals? If the firm is constantly adapting its approach to training employees, does this suggest you would be consistently and effectively supported in your role?

Size of intake and teams

Does the firm hire only a small intake of juniors each year, or would you be part of a large pool of newbies? Does the firm tend to staff smaller teams on matters (e.g. staffing a partner, one or two associates, and a trainee on deals), or much larger teams?

Explain why you care 

Link your comments about intake and team size to your preferred working style. For example, you might prefer being part of a smaller intake or working in smaller teams if you feel this would give you the chance to earn greater responsibility and exposure at an earlier stage (perhaps because fewer juniors tend to be staffed on matters in firms with smaller intakes and teams). 

You might also feel less anonymous and more integral when working as part of a smaller team. Conversely, you might prefer the idea of joining a larger intake or working in larger teams, as this could give you a larger pool of colleagues with whom you can form professional relationships and from who you can learn.

Secondments and placements

Does the firm offer unparalleled or particularly unique opportunities to work in overseas offices or go on international, client or pro bono secondments during your training programme? Note that simply stating that a firm offers international opportunities likely won’t differentiate the firm from its closest competitors. 

However, if the firm is one of the only firms to offer (for example) guaranteed secondments, pro bono secondments, or stints at particularly interesting clients’ offices, or if the firm offers a greater range of international secondments than its competitors, then this might be a sufficiently unique point to raise.

Explain why you care

Do international secondments appeal because you have a genuine interest in working internationally and building relationships with colleagues around the world? If so, be prepared to explain how you have explored this interest to date, which jurisdictions you would like to work in, and why. Do you feel that international placements would be enriching experiences that can provide an awareness of cultural and regional differences? 

Is this especially important given how much of the firm’s work is multi-jurisdictional? Do client secondments appeal because they would enable you to better understand clients’ perspectives and priorities, and how they operate more generally (including how they make decisions)? Could this hone your commercial acumen by shaping your understanding of how different companies operate from a commercial standpoint, thus feeding into your broader professional development? 

Longer term development 

Are you expected to specialise soon after you qualify, or does the firm encourage you to develop a broader practice? For example, if you decide to qualify as a finance lawyer, will you have the opportunity to work on a broad range of finance-related matters (e.g. corporate lending, acquisition finance, real estate finance, debt capital markets, restructuring etc.), or will you be expected to pursue a narrower sub-category of finance work? Did most of the firm’s partners train at the firm?

Explain why you care

Do you feel that specialising in a niche area will enable you to develop deep technical expertise and truly get to grips with that area from an earlier stage? Alternatively, if the firm enables its employees to carry out a broader range of work, will this help to ensure your career remains more varied and interesting, whilst providing more opportunities to learn in the long term. Or do you feel that building a broader base of experience will make you a more well-rounded professional? If most partners trained there, does this reflect well on the firm’s ability to develop its lawyers? Is it a testament to the firm’s culture that so many people stay for the long haul?