This month...
Featured Candidates
Top 4 Strategic Interview Styles
For Lawyers, Perks to Fit a Lifestyle
Reference Checking 101
Featured Candidates
 
Litigation Associate
Michael is an excellent young litigator who has a keen understanding of commercial/business litigation. He graduated in the top 3% of his class from law school as well as graduating magna cum laude with his MBA. He is seeking a litigation position that will continue to let him develop his already fantastic skills and surround him with other top tier attorneys.
See his full resume here:
 
Tax Asssociate
(w/small book)
Kreig practices exclusively in the areas of tax, estate planning, financial regulation and probate. He is also a top academic performer, holding both and LLM in Taxation and a MS in financial planning in addition to his BA and JD. He has significant experience performing complex tax work for Fortune 500 companies and very high net worth individuals. 
See his full resume here:
 
Litigation Secretary
Valerie has an extraordinarily stable job history, and was a very high performing secretary at a large downtown firm for 26+ years. She has extensive experience in complex litigation.  A veteran administrator, she brings a seasoned perspective to the table that serious attorneys will appreciate.
See her full resume here.
 
Litigation Paralegal
Judy is a veteran litigation paralegal. She has extensive trial preparation experience and is well versed in complex litigation and their related document productions. Jude is also comfortable working with everyone in the litigation process, from top corporate executives and partner level attorneys to expert witnesses to other administrative staff.
see her full resume here.

 

Useful Links
Join Our Mailing List
Law Q News
Greetings!

Happy New Year!

We are happy to send you the first edition of our monthly newsletter, "Law Q News".  It will include featured candidates, relevant legal employment articles, and a short message from Law Q.  The 'Featured Candidates' section, located in the blue left hand margin, will include a cross section of some of our top attorney, paralegal and legal secretary candidates in high demand practice areas.  The highlighted articles section, located below, will include articles that are relevant to Human Resource and Recruiting professionals as well as any other legal professional interested in hiring and market trends in the legal community.  The articles will provide insight on varied subjects such as recruiting methods, hiring practices, retention programs, compensation, and significant happenings in the legal market.  We hope that Law Q News will provide you with some valuable information regarding the legal community and introduce you to some excellent legal candidates. 

 

Many of Colorado's best law firms and companies have interviewed and hired the finest available attorneys and legal staff through Law Q.  In order to make it even easier for you to look at some of the best legal candidates currently available in Colorado and nationwide, we have launched a 'Recruiting' section on our website.  To view attorney or legal staff resumes, please see our 'Recruiting' link at www.lawqteam.com.  Please also feel free to contact either David or Chris with questions on any of Law Q's services or candidates.  We wish you and yours only the best in 2008!  

Very Truly Yours,

 

David Fennell and Chris Newton

LAW Q, LLC

Top 4 Strategic Interview Styles
CareerBuilder.com

Most interviewers have never been through a class on interview styles. It's a surprise to many that there are strategic techniques you can use to learn more about a candidate than questions can reveal. Learn all four styles and use them to reveal the candidate behind the interview face.
 
Relaxed Interviewing

To use this technique, you need to create a very relaxed environment for the interview. Greet the candidate, ask if you can get them a drink and have a casual conversation before actually starting the interview. Be careful to not sit across a desk or table. Sitting on the same side, or using a round table works well. When sitting, position yourself in an obviously relaxed position, but be careful to not cross your arms. Room lighting can also have an influence. Natural or incandescent light is the best, whereas florescent lights can often make for a more stressful environment. You may also consider doing the interview outside if it is a nice day. When you begin to ask questions, do so in a calm voice. Phrase your questions to not sound harsh. This comfortable environment and style of asking questions should help the candidate to feel more comfortable, often resulting in better dialogue.

Intimidating Interviewing

With this technique you intentionally create an intimidating atmosphere. Position yourself at the opposite end of a large table, or across a large desk. Bright florescent lighting is ideal. Raise your chair higher than the candidate's chair so you appear rigid and in a more powerful stance. The goal is to create the image of an "all-business" interviewer who does not want to engage in small talk. It is best to start with extremely difficult and uncomfortable questions. Maintain eye contact while showing little expression on your face as the candidate answers your questions. Challenge the answers provided when possible to see if your candidate can handle on-the-spot pressure. Bold interviewers may even ask a candidate to sit up straight or to speak using more formal language during the interview. This style is an effective tool to evaluate a candidate's ability to handles stress, overcome hostile communication, and work under pressure.

"Friend" Interviewing

Some candidates are very effective at putting on the "interview face" and may seem like the perfect fit when interviewed by a manager or supervisor. However, an interview with potential co-workers could bring out his or her true personality.

A third option is to have friendly, current employees interview the candidate. The employees should approach the candidate as a friend and future co-worker, trying to bring out the true nature of the candidate. Some candidates are very effective at putting on the "interview face" and may seem like the perfect fit when interviewed by a manager or supervisor. However, an interview with potential co-workers could bring out his or her true personality. It is important to make this interview feel like a friendly discussion between future co-workers and not an actual interview. If done properly, this tactic should get the candidate to relax enough to reveal character traits that may otherwise be unseen.

Panel Interviewing

When implementing this technique, you create a team of several members, each with a different interviewing style. The team then interviews the candidate as a group, freely asking questions from a pre-planned list. Panel interviewing method forces the candidate to react to a variety of questions and personalities, and will show if the candidate can handle a situation in which diversity is a factor. Be sure to pre-define a leader when doing panel interviews. If the candidate is obviously not the right fit, the leader should cut the interview short to save the team's time. After the interview, team members will have differing opinions about the candidate. Engage in open debate about the pros and cons of each candidate shortly after the interview. Consensus may not be reached, but the open dialogue will help identify the best candidates. It is usually valuable for the leader do one-on-one interviews with the top few candidates before making a final decision.

To ensure a properly executed interview, before initiating the interview process, meet and define the questions and styles to be used by all interviewers. Distribute candidate resumes or applications to all interviewers and discuss the desired characteristics of the ideal candidate. Be strategic with both the questions and styles used by each person conducting an interview. Arrange your interview room or rooms to augment the success of your interview style. And, plan your list of questions carefully to make sure that you are not crossing any legal boundaries. With a little preplanning, you can successfully manage the entire interview process, and hopefully gain a new employee that is a perfect match for your organization.

For Lawyers, Perks to Fit a Lifestyle
Lynnley Browning, New York Times
 
Even lawyers need a hug. When workdays stretch into worknights and the pressure to meet the quota for billable hours grows, lawyers and staff members at the firm of Perkins Coie can often expect a little bonus.
In Perkins Coie's Chicago office, members of the firm's "happiness committee" recently left candied apples on everyone's desks. Last month, the happiness committee surprised lawyers, paralegals and assistants in the Washington office with milkshakes from a local Potbelly Sandwich Works, a favorite lunch spot.

"That's the whole beauty of it all - it's random acts of kindness," said Lori Anger, client relations manager of Perkins Coie, which is based in Seattle. "We have pretty strict hours, so it's a nice way to surprise people."

The benefits for lawyers have burgeoned in recent years as firms pull out the stops to attract top-notch talent. While perks for the partners have always been common, many are now finding their way to associates - young lawyers who have not yet made partner.

And with those associates routinely jumping ship to go elsewhere, law firms are trying to create a workplace that caters to their young recruits' wants and needs, while freeing them to bill 60 hours or more a week.

"We're in a war for talent," Gary Beu, chief human resources officer at the firm of Kirkland & Ellis, said, "and we have to do everything we can to attract and retain that talent."

The benefits go beyond the laptops and BlackBerrys, late-night rides home, Friday beer-and-pretzel fests and sports tickets that are standard fare at many large and midsize law firms. Many of the new perks recognize a lifestyle change that law firms are just coming to grips with.

"Money is not the only thing that drives these lawyers right now," said Marina Sirras, who runs a recruitment firm in New York for lawyers. "They want to be able to have a family and enjoy their family. This has never been as hot an issue."

Law firms have been slower than some other businesses to award benefits, in part because of their smaller, and often complex, private structures.

On offer now are concierge services, in which a lawyer can have the equivalent of a personal valet pick up theater and sports tickets, the dry cleaning, take a car to the repair shop or even choose a Halloween costume.

"We compete in terms of having a life," Ms. Anger said. "We don't compete by dangling a lot of material perks." Unusual in the industry, Perkins Coie offers pet insurance.

The perks come on top of higher salaries and larger bonuses - this year, the top-offs have been doubled at some practices. At the New York office of Cravath, Swaine & Moore, an old-line firm, associates will receive special payouts of $10,000 to $50,000, in addition to their year-end bonuses up to $35,000.

At the same time, law firms have begun demanding more from associates, raising minimum billable hours over the years.

To combat burnout, some firms also offer extended sabbaticals for a wide range of pursuits - to study classical piano, for instance, or work on political campaigns.

But while some of these benefits take the form of highly practical solutions - like on-site child care - others raise questions whether law firms are subsidizing a cushy lifestyle.

"As if a $160,000 starting salary wasn't enough for associates" fresh out of law school, "yes, there's more," said Peter Johnson of Law Practice Consultants in Boston.

For example, Sullivan & Cromwell, another old-line firm, with more than 600 lawyers, guarantees the first $100,000 of mortgages of associates who have been with the firm for at least six months.

DLA Piper, the nation's largest law firm, reimburses employees $2,000 when they buy a hybrid car. Fulbright & Jaworski offers on-site tailoring and reimbursements to employees who buy a Nissan or General Motors vehicle.

"In our business, people are our main asset so our benefits are designed to keep people happy and healthy," a spokesman for DLA Piper, Jason Costa, said.

Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, a 600-lawyer firm based in New York, offers employees a service akin to a personal issues coach and psychotherapist through a deal with Corporate Counseling Associates of Manhattan. The consulting firm has a battery of staff psychologists and social workers to provide advice on issues including stress, anxiety, depression and divorce.

While many companies have offered employee assistance programs over the years, few have Ph.D. psychologists on staff.

A spokeswoman for Fried, Frank, Paula Zirinsky, said, "We want employees to be successful in their personal as well as their work lives."

The new perks are separate from the wining and dining that top law firms conduct each year for their summer associates, whom they hope to lure back after they finish law school.

read the whole article here.

The Risks and Benefits of Reference Checking

by Paul Barada, Monster.com Reference Expert


While it probably isn't possible to do a classic risk/benefit analysis when it comes to reference checking, employers need to take a close look at the relative risks, like being sued for invasion of privacy if you do check versus being sued for negligent hiring if you don't. It's important to determine which risk carries the greatest potential for harm to the prospective employer.

Are employers trapped in a no-win situation? Unfortunately, many employers think so. They believe only rudimentary checks of a candidate's dates of employment, job titles and maybe credit history are the only risk-free tools available for screening.

But such cursory attempts to merely confirm a prospective employee is who he claims to be is only doing half the job. Common sense tells us that employers should be free to exchange job-performance information to help ensure that the candidate not only is who he claims to be, but also can actually do the job the employer needs done.

But how do you accomplish that without risking being sued? There are simple steps every employer can take to reduce the front-end risk of litigation in the hiring process:

  • Have every candidate for employment sign a comprehensive waiver giving the prospective employer express permission not only to verify any information provided, but also to contact references and anyone else familiar with the candidate's work history and job performance. By doing that, employers eliminate the risk of invasion-of-privacy lawsuits.
  • Insist that the candidate provide the names of appropriate job-related references -- people with whom the candidate has actually worked on a daily basis within the past five to seven years. The ideal set of references should include at least one former superior, one coworker and one subordinate. It isn't always possible to get that specific mix of references, but every candidate has worked for and with other people, so the prospective employer can view the candidate from at least two different perspectives.
  • The most important thing for employers to keep in mind in the hiring process is who's most likely to be sued. Candidates are far more likely to sue a reference than the prospective employer. If an employer declines to hire a candidate based on comments by a reference supplied by the candidate, who is responsible? The employer who reasonably relied on what the reference had to say, or the reference who may or may not have intentionally and maliciously lied about the candidate? The accusatory finger will be pointed at the reference, not the prospective employer.
  • Employers, however, need to also remember that they do have a responsibility to use reasonable care in the process. That's why it's so important to check multiple references. For instance, if three or four references say a candidate's interpersonal skills are bad, the employer is on far safer ground relying on that information than relying on what just one reference had to say.

What about the risk of negligent hiring? As just noted, the failure to use reasonable care in the hiring process can be far more damaging to a company than running the relatively slight risk of being sued for trying to make sure the right person for the job is hired.

Suppose your company has a policy of only verifying dates of employment and doing a credit check. Then, suppose you hire a candidate with a documented history of workplace violence, which you could have discovered if you had carefully checked references. Next, suppose that newly hired person injures one or more of your employees or customers. Who do you think will be named as defendant in a lawsuit brought by the injured parties? You? Your company? You bet! And when it's pointed out that you could have discovered the history of workplace violence, there will be a heavy price to pay.

So which is the greater risk: checking or not checking? Clearly, the far greater risk in today's litigious society is failing to carefully check the backgrounds and references of every person hired. To do less is to invite far more costly consequences.