In yesterday’s Platforum9 session, Ross McGregor, an interview coach, former Linklaters trainee, and Akin Gump lawyer, argued that candidates “nail” legal interviews by putting themselves in the interviewer’s shoes, then communicating with clarity, structure, and purpose. He traced his own path from law studies and training at Linklaters (including London and Tokyo) to a move to Akin Gump in search of greater responsibility and a more entrepreneurial environment.

That shift from large institutional clients to more entrepreneurial, fast-moving work became a recurring theme: your best “name brand” option may not be your best personal fit. McGregor encouraged candidates to think critically about the environment in which they will thrive, rather than defaulting to the biggest logo.

Why Interviews Feel Harder Now

McGregor argued that the market has become more demanding and more opaque. In London, competition and salary pressure (particularly with the expansion of US firms) have raised expectations of what trainees and junior lawyers should know from day one. In his view, firms are hiring less for “potential” and more for readiness, widening the gap between what the university teaches and what interviews test.

On top of that, interview processes have become more complex: generic psychometric tests have increasingly been replaced by firm-specific assessments, leaving candidates unsure what to prepare for and, as a result, more anxious.

The “Mirror Problem”: Students vs Associates

A key insight was McGregor’s “mirror” diagnosis of why candidates get rejected depending on career stage; the reasons can look opposite but lead to the same outcome.

• Students are “outside looking in”: limited exposure to corporate life can lead them to treat interviews like exams or tutorials rather than fully understanding the commercial context.
• Associates can fall into complacency: they may not have interviewed in years and can struggle to package experience in a way that is relevant, structured, and persuasive.

The Core Principle: Think Like the Interviewer

McGregor’s “number one” advice was to consistently flip your perspective: stop answering from your own vantage point and start answering from the interviewer’s. He likened it to good lawyering, communicating in the way that best serves the audience (a client, or here, the interviewer).

This matters most for questions candidates think they have “nailed” (and therefore often over-rehearse), such as:

• “Why do you want to work at this firm?”
• “Why do you want to be a commercial lawyer?”

Many candidates deliver long, polished narratives that still fail the basic test: they do not answer the question actually being asked.

Reframing “Commercial Awareness”

A common misconception was challenged: commercial awareness isn’t mainly about reciting headlines or memorising deal details. Interviewers may expect a baseline, but what they really look for is the ability to apply information, reason with it, and make sound judgments in context.

In practice, that means moving from “what” to “so what” and, critically, “why does this matter to me?” He urged candidates to articulate genuine intrinsic motivation in plain, human language (what excites you; what kind of problems energise you), because it helps interviewers predict how you will show up under pressure.

Preparation: Research Helps, Simulation Changes Outcomes

When an audience member, Ron Given, asked how to reduce uncertainty, McGregor agreed that candidates should research firms, teams, and the nature of the work. For students, much of that is available publicly; for laterals, culture and team dynamics are harder to assess from the outside, so networks matter.

But he cautioned against confusing research with readiness. His analogy: reading books about swimming does not teach you to swim; practice does. McGregor framed interview prep like preparing for a crucial client call: you would never walk in cold; you would train, rehearse, and get senior feedback on your structure and talking points.

UK vs US Firms: Support vs Responsibility

On differences between traditional UK firms and US firms competing in similar London markets, McGregor suggested UK firms often provide greater infrastructure and support, but with a more hierarchical structure. US firms may offer earlier responsibility and a “learn by doing” culture that suits more entrepreneurial personalities.

AI: Useful Leverage, But Stay in Control

In the closing minutes, the discussion turned to AI. It was framed as a useful leverage tool for synthesising large volumes of information quickly, particularly for time-pressed candidates getting up to speed. But for CVs and written materials, the advice was to use AI to critique rather than rewrite: protect your own voice and avoid obvious “AI fingerprints”, which can jar when your written tone doesn’t match how you speak in an interview.

What Candidates Need To Focus On

• Choose the organisation intentionally: brand matters less than fit.
• Prepare for complexity and uncertainty: processes are more bespoke and less predictable than before.
• Put yourself in the interviewer’s shoes, then answer the question being asked clearly and directly.
• Demonstrate “commercial awareness” through reasoning and application, not memorisation of an FT article.
• Do your research, practice under pressure with structured feedback.
• Use AI, but do not substitute personal voice and authenticity.