Site icon Legal Cheek

London law firm partner with 2:1 degree ‘immediately discards’ applicants with a first because she thinks they’re arrogant

Tell that to your parents when they nag you to do more revision

A law firm partner who has over ten years experience recruiting has revealed she gives priority to 2:1 candidates because first class degree holders are arrogant.

Sarah Perkins, chartered patent attorney and owner of namesake intellectual property firm Stevens Hewlett & Perkins, has adopted this non-traditional approach to recruitment because:

In all my years I have been recruiting, I have singularly failed to find a good candidate with a first class degree, so I choose to consider and interview people with lower classifications first.

The 52-year-old University of Edinburgh grad — who herself received a 2:1 — also said first class candidates “talk down” to interviewers, “think they can do anything” and ultimately lack the skills needed to work in a law firm environment. She added:

Academic brilliance encourages an arrogance that is not helpful.

When Perkins is recruiting patent attorneys — who must have a science degree and aren’t required to have a background in law — she “immediately discards anyone who has a top degree and no extra-curricular activities on their CV”. She will only interview first class degree holders if their extra-curricular work is “outstanding”, but ultimately prefers 2:1ers because they’re “more rounded”.

Though we doubt any budding lawyers will be throwing their non-charitable trusts notes out the window to sabotage their degree results, we still wanted to find out a bit more about Perkins’ uncommon recruitment approach.

Nailing first class marks in exams tends to be a good indicator of work ethic, determination and effort, so why favour lower scoring candidates?

When we put that to Perkins, she said:

I wholly agree that a first class degree is (usually) a good indicator of work ethic, determination and effort. However I also consider ‘soft skills’ such as communication skills and emotional intelligence to be important. My approach to recruitment would only be considered non-traditional by those who would consider such ‘soft skills’ to be of lesser importance.

But where does it end? If being academically high-achieving equals arrogance, then does that mean Perkins wouldn’t employ an Oxbridge grad? Again we put this to her, and she replied:

I do not attribute arrogance regarding one’s intellectual abilities to particular universities.

In fact, Perkins thinks this arrogance predates even the university enrolment stage, let alone graduation:

My personal experience from my involvement in careers events within schools is that some students have developed an arrogance in their intellectual abilities before they even get to university!

Exit mobile version