News

Too many students aspire to be Harvey Specter ‘rainmakers’, says law school director

By on
54

It’s not what firms want

Spending hours watching legal dramas instead of working on your employability skills is not the best way to make yourself a good lawyer.

Suits may be the biggest culprit of all. The US TV series is a big hit among law students, and has now been given a new lease of life since Prince Harry began dating one of the show’s actresses.

While binge-watching episodes every now and then isn’t going to hurt you, Jo-Anne Pugh fears too many youngsters are deriving their perception of the law from Suits and the like. Pugh, the director of LPC programmes at BPP Law School, continues:

[Some students] don’t understand that law firms will want recruits who can add value in very different ways and don’t just want the Harvey Specter ‘rainmakers’ and deal brokers who have been traditionally feted.

One of the best ways to impress law firms, Pugh says, is to be technologically savvy. She continues:

You also need to consider the potential role that artificial intelligence and big data could have, and indeed already is starting to have, on the sector. While machines aren’t set to replace lawyers just yet, estimates on tasks that are automatable range from 13-23%. That too will have a big impact on the type of person that firms will be looking to hire.

Pugh’s comments come off the back of new research by BPP into the future of legal practice.

Its prediction: there will be gender parity at senior partner level come 2037. Currently 47% of all lawyers are women, but this will rise to 71% in the next two decades, Pugh believes. There’s certainly enough female talent coming through the system to make this possible — 61% of law graduates are female, and applications by women to study law at university now outnumber men two to one.

By comparison, the Bar Standards Board (BSB) has predicted it’ll be 2067 before half of QCs are women.

For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek's careers events:

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub

54 Comments

Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

Anonymous

Prick

Anonymous

I think it is actually a fair point.

Anonymous

Reality check: Suits is a (barely) legal drama soap. Events and characters are exaggerated for dramatic effect. Being a brash and suave Specter clone is not going to necessarily be a recipe for success – and a lot of people are not anything like as suave, smooth and witty as he is because he is (yes !) a fictional character, a stereotype.

That is Pugh’s point I believe you total muppet !

Anonymous

“[furns] don’t just want the Harvey Specter ‘rainmakers’ and deal brokers who have been traditionally feted.

Pretty certain this is not a specific reference to Harvey Specter, but a generic reference to rainmakers and deal makers, whether smooth and suave or fat, sweaty and on wife no. 4, as opposed to swotty, technical types.

Anonymous

What a sad irony for you downticking losers that it soon won’t matter a jot how much ‘rain’ you once ‘made’ as it will no longer benefit you to kiss the arse of M&A MDs at investment banks (where you MC bellends source much of your coin let’s be honest) as such organisations continue to develop their more efficient, more savvy and closer to the business in-house legal teams (fully silked up counsel included), AI/machine learning is utilised to the max (oh it’s happening mofos – trust !) and the UK’s economy continues to decline as a result of the Brexshit a good many of you tits voted for.

Laugh on….

Anonymous

*MC bellends/aspirants

Anonymous

How will that make this woman’s statement any truer?

Goldman and JPM aren’t going to pay their in-house document gimps MC partner wages just because the MC’s been killed off, it will just mean bright people with BD skills don’t become lawyers.

Somewhat ignores things like IPOs though.

Anonymous

Yes quite, “bright people with BD skills” will be able to perhaps pursue something more productive and useful with their lives. Perhaps more beneficial to society in general than striving to be a partner at some parasitic law firm.

Anonymous

People who are motivated by a desire to earn MC partner money aren’t suddenly going to decide to become teachers and doctors instead.

They’ll just join the bun fight to be one of MDs they currently seek instructions from or (if they haven’t got the maths) work for WPP, lobbyists or management consultancies.

Anonymous

Keep going – you’ll get that TC eventually

Anonymous

I’m 3 PQE…

Jones Day EP

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

Revenue Generating Fixed Cost

Fair enough, but you’re almost never going to be a rainmaker at entry level.

Law firms won’t go to law schools seeking out a rainmaker, they’ll be looking for a revenue generating fixed cost.

If you turn out to be a rainmaker, that’s great, but don’t jump the gun by 8-12 years.

Jones Day Associate

I don’t know about rainmakers, but here at Jones Day we like our applicants to make things pretty wet.

Anonymous

Ditto the above.
Once you hit Senior Associate level and you’re not bringing in the cash with new clients or matters, expect to get the boot.

I don’t want expensive lawyers in my City firm who don’t know how to make money. The business is all about money. If you Partnership you need to know how to make money and take risks. Sitting on your bumb and never opening your gob to announce some intelligent or commercial idea doesn’t wash well with the City. Sink or Swim.

But of course being a dickhead like Harvey doesn’t get you anywhere. But being smart enough to understand clients and commercial awareness does.

Has Ms Pugh ever worked for commercial firm before… probs not.

Anonymous

I don’t think you’re a lawyer, pal. You can’t spell or string a sentence together.

@CRP

I’m a rainmaker.

It rains in my pants all the time!

That’s why I’m the new face of Tena!

Watch out for my ads!

Jason

It’s pissening

Charlotte Proud

This is supposed to be about me, isn’t it?

Well it’s not funny anymore. I’m not incontinent and do not wear incontinence pants.

Frankly, laughing at those who do is not funny either.

This needs to stop.

Anonymous

Yes, you wear NAPPY!!

Anonymous

Breaking news: trying to mimic fictional characters from a TV shows does not always work out for the best.

Anyway, you can be a complete idiot and useless in every other respect, but yeah, money talks and bullshit walks. Either bring in paying clients or take a hike. The borderline-liability buffoon with all the right contacts will always trump the brilliant but socially useless geek.

Anonymous

KK must be soooo happy she managed to get a picture of Harry in the story. She’s keeping the Tatler dream alive

Anonymous

Katie “OK magazine” King

Anonymous

There I was modelling myself on Rake.

Anonymous

Too many for-profit law schools aspire to screw their students, says Legal Cheek commenter.

Anonymous

When are you launching the MOST LIST 2018

Anonymous

Stop press: Arrogant self-centred law students see character on TV with similar characteristics as something to aspire to.

BS ALERT

Poor advice! Graduate recruitment teams are sick of candidates droaning on about ‘technology and AI’ thinking they are giving unique answers. Everyone is doing it. Stay commercial as possible, understand what the firm is renowned for / specialises in. Compose an answer that is thoughtful, current, succinct and commercial.

Anonymous

Nobody should seriously read Katie’s articles for application advice. Why get tips from someone who was unable to land a training contract? Blind leading the blind springs to mind

Anonymous

No one should read anyone’s comments on here for application advice either, considering 95% of them have never secured a TC in their life.

Sir Geffroy De Joinville

Vien ici Pierre. These silly Anglais are still watching TV and they think eet eez real. Hehehehehehe

Anonymous

It says something about KK’s target readership (wannabe lawyers as she would describe them) that she has to spell something as blindingly obvious as this out

Anonymous

By that I assume you mean wannabe lawyers who will do a degree but never get a TC. Proper lawyers don’t read this crap. KK doesn’t speak the language of anyone who has done a day’s work inside a law firm.

Pierre Piene Forte et Dure

Wat eez a rainmaker? Some kind of Anglais toilet perversion?

Herman the German

How vonderful zat you Englishers find ze toilet so amusink!

Anonymous

If only Katie could have told this to her younger self she might have stood a chance of getting a training contract.

Anonymous

More fucking drivel.

Anonymous

This is hardly news. It’s common sense. Another useless Katie King fluffy article aimed at the hashtag generation. Speak to someone actually at a law firm for proper interview tips.

Anonymous

What do you expect for a website aimed at the ‘hashtag generation’?

Anonymous

This is an interesting insight into how KK’s mind works – she goes straight from Suits to then link to a picture of Harry and his girlfriend. This is more Heat / Hello magazine than legal news website

Anonymous

Braindead inane dribble of an article.

Anonymous

You’re brilliant, Katie.

Anonymous

Hi Alex!

Anonymous

Once men are the minority in law, will they get a Men in Law society, division, and diversity/promotion access schemes?

Doubt it.

Anonymous

Man, the robots are taking over. Some day soon we’re going to need John Connor to take back planet Earth.

Anonymous

Every time I read a Katie K piece I become a bit dumber.

Anonymous

But at least you can find out who Prince Harry is dating

Not House

The on call staff last night were not impressed when I attempted to imitate Dr Gregory House. I diagnosed an elderly women who came in with a headache with lupus before giving her a spectrum of antibiotics for her immune system which ended up causing some of her major organs to shut down.

Anonymous

What is this nonsense that I’ve just read? I’ve just started law school and I didn’t realise that this was the level of intellectual writing aimed at the profession. Seriously worried I’m not going to be challenged intellectually.

Anonymous

Sorry to break it to you homeboy but that response seems to indicate that you already might be…

Anonymous

Rainmakers? Isn’t that just another term for bullshitter. Sell the punter you can make it rain, to get the fees in. They can’t make it rain. Can you make it rain. Of course you can’t.

Anonymous

just in case you were worried LC weren’t dumbing-down enough with the content – along comes a silly piece about Suits, Harry and AI (done sooo many times before). The GCSE students have something to read again.

Anonymous

I assumed this story was written by a GCSE student

Join the conversation