6 Costly Mistakes In “Why This Firm” Answers

“Why this firm?” is one of the most common application and interview questions. And every cycle, I see candidates make the same mistakes when answering it.

It’s also one of the most important. The firm needs to know you’re clear about your motivations. If your answer isn’t convincing, it gives the recruiter an easy reason to put you on the rejection pile.

In this post, I’ll outline 6 common mistakes I see every year in “Why this firm” answers.

So, let’s get into it.

Mistake 1: Being too general about the firm’s features

Firms tell you to tailor your application to them, but most candidates don’t.

They describe features of the firm in generic terms. There’s a sliding scale here from generic to specific, and the more specific you are, the more you differentiate that firm from every other firm. The firm then reads your application as tailored to them.

The test you can use is the Name Swap Test:

If you can swap the firm’s name for another firm’s name and the answer still works, it’s too general.

So in your research and planning, identify the specific features that differentiate the firm. The bar isn’t so high that you need something exclusive to the firm. But you do need something specific enough to set the firm apart from most other firms.

Generic answers can only show a surface-level understanding of the firm. Specific ones show a deeper understanding. That’s how you stand out from the pile of generic answers, how you demonstrate genuine interest in the firm and avoid the firm thinking you’re applying to firms randomly.

Mistake 2: Not explaining why a specific feature interests YOU

So many candidates seem to forget that this question is asking them about their motivations.

The question is more about you than it is about the firm. The recruiter already knows whatever you tell them about the firm. What they want to learn from your answer is your personal motivations for wanting to train there.

To do this, you need to reflect deeply. Ideally, you start that work early, as you do your firm selection, do research on the firm and attend events, not when you sit down to write the application.

The grad recruitment team at CMS said this, which illustrates the point:

“We want to see you’ve thought more deeply about it than the average graduate.”

To explain why a specific feature of the firm interests you, link it to your own personal experiences and interests. This is how you personalise and tailor your answer. Other candidates shouldn’t be able to write the same answer because each candidate has a unique set of experiences, interests, and motivations.

But when candidates try to do this, they often fall into a related trap.

Mistake 3: Drifting into a “Why you” answer

Many candidates fall into a trap when they try to link their motivations to their experiences.

They drift into describing those experiences in a way that evidences their skills and attributes. This veers off into answering a “why you” style question when the “why this firm” question isn’t asking for that. And answering the wrong question is enough to put your application on the ‘no’ pile.

This is what it often looks like in practice:

• The question asks, “Why do you want to work at this law firm?” The candidate answers with one of the firm’s practice-area strengths.
• They describe some work experience in that practice area, but fail to connect it to their interest.
• They list what they did, what they achieved, and the skills they developed.

All good evidence of their skills and impact. But none of it explains why that experience influenced their interest in this firm specifically.

The challenge I give my coaching clients on this is that it’s no good just describing the experience. You might have hated it. Having a related experience doesn’t necessarily explain why you now want to train at this specific firm. It might be implied, but you need to write explicitly and answer the question directly.

Keeping your answer squarely focused on the question is a competitive advantage. Many candidates fail to do this.

Mistake 4: Treating the answer as a knowledge essay

Many candidates approach this question as if it were an academic essay.

They’ve spent years writing essays, so the approach is familiar. And they’ve been told to research the firm, so they focus too much on facts about the firm rather than on themselves.

The question is asking about your motivations. Specific facts about the firm only earn their place when they support that.

The most common version of this mistake is work name-dropping. Candidates cite a high-profile deal or case the firm has advised on, but it sits in the answer as a standalone fact. It’s there to show what they’ve researched, with no connection to their personal reasons.

The underlying advice is right. Mentioning a deal can show deeper research and understanding of the firm. But the advice is commonly misunderstood and misapplied.

So don’t quote facts about a deal or case without connecting them to your reasons. Explain why you’re interested in a specific aspect of the firm’s work, cite a deal or piece of work as evidence of that, and then give your personal reason for why it interests you.

The focus should be YOU and your motivations first. Any specific facts about the firm support that, not the other way round.

Get this right, and your answer reads as personal and motivated. The candidates who get it wrong are writing research showcases that any candidate could have written.

Mistake 5: Not putting yourself at the centre of your answer

A majority of candidates fail to focus all of their answers on themselves.

This is surprising, given that the question asks for YOUR reasons for wanting to train at this firm.

For example, many candidates start their answers with a fact about the firm, often with no reference to themselves at all:

{LAW FIRM NAME} is a leading City law firm with a strong reputation for competition law, as evidenced by its Band 1 ranking in Chambers & Partners.

When a recruiter reads that, their immediate thought will be “So what?”. And I promise you, you don’t want them thinking that when reading your answer.

To avoid this, I have a simple rule. Start every answer, and every reason within the answer, with the word “I” or “My”. That way, you’re answering the question directly and focusing on yourself, which is what the recruiter is trying to learn about.

This one change can have a profound effect on your answers.

The last mistake is more about format than substance.

Mistake 6: A lack of structure

Recruiters often tell me these answers lack structure.

And if your writing lacks structure, it weakens the evidence you provide recruiters of your written communication skills. Too often, I read answers that are a jumble of points, and I get lost quickly. That’s not the impression you want to make in a super-competitive recruitment process.

The “why this firm” question requires you to persuade the reader of your motivations with a well-reasoned argument. Without a clear, easy-to-follow structure, that argument won’t land.

The reason I often see for answers lacking structure is that candidates do their thinking and their writing at the same time. They’re still working out their reasons as they write and edit.

When I see this with my coaching clients, I tell them to split the two. Spend more time thinking. Outline first, write second. Without a clear outline of your points, you won’t write a clear, well-structured answer.

Then write each point in its own paragraph so the reader can follow your reasoning easily. Always add paragraphs. A single wall of text is an awful thing for a recruiter to see when they have to read hundreds of applications.

Working on structure will improve your answer as much as working on the substance of your points.

Avoid these mistakes and write a better “Why This Firm” answer

So, now you know these common mistakes, you can avoid them and gain a competitive advantage.

Writing a good “why this firm” answer comes down to the thinking you do about your reasons, and about identifying what’s influenced your interests. The same is true for your “Why Commercial Law?” answer, as both questions are designed to identify the candidates who’ve done the deeper thinking.

Most candidates don’t do this work in their first recruitment cycle. Over their next cycle (or more), this thinking and reasoning tends to crystallise, and their answers slowly start to improve.

The good news for you is that you don’t need to wait. You can start thinking about this now and use this list of mistakes as a checklist.

That’s how you stand out from the crowd and get recruiters to sit up and notice you.