the recruitment of the big law

And, of course, candidates should also have a real excitement about the actual practice of law. (Tip: Don't mention Law & Order in an interview.) These are the people that Meyerhofer says will happily "sit and argue over the best ways to draft certain provisions."

A September, 2008 paper from UC Berkeley professors Marjorie Shultz and Sheldon Zedeck suggests that Keeley is onto something. Attempting to help law schools identify promising future lawyers, the report's authors examined a number of "predictors" of lawyering effectiveness. Typical measures of "geekiness" like LSAT scores and undergraduate grade point averages were not reliable indicators of later lawyering abilities. Instead, situational judgment tests, biographical information, and seven specific personality traits -- ambition, adjustment, sociability, prudence, interpersonal sensitivity, inquisitiveness, and learning approach -- could better forecast an applicant's later success as an attorney.If you want to join MMORPGs, you can buy Diablo 3 account and buy d3 gold here. If searching for cheap Diablo 3 account sell, you can go to Farmer100 which is a professional MMORPGs trading site.

Of course, most firms would love to hire these social and inquisitive lawyers, but picking them out of the overflowing candidate pool is not always easy. Law students don't usually confess to their interviewers that they don't like to work hard or have no passion for practicing law.

Woldow points to a few specific biographical indicators of future Big Law superstars: first-generation lawyers without legacies of Supreme Court justices and Big Law partners; first or second-generation immigrants; and people from modest economic backgrounds. These people, she says, often come in with different expectations. Instead of thinking they are due money and success, they think, "'I have to earn it and make my way.'"

the suitable persons in the big law

I never should have been an attorney.

I am physically incapable of pulling all-nighters, I avoid conflict instead of pursuing it, and I have essentially zero drive to fight for the interests of multi-billion dollar corporations. So it did not come as much of a surprise to anyone -- except my mom and dad, perhaps -- when after exactly one year of practice at a big law firm, I turned in my BlackBerry and walked out the door.

Big Law is famously tough. But despite its reputation, law students continue to line up for consideration at the country's top firms, hoping to land a coveted spot as an associate. Many of these young lawyers, though, will find that they are simply not cut out for law firm life and, according to Pamela Woldow of law firm consultancy Edge International, approximately 70% will leave within the first four years of practice.

At a time when their very survival seems up in the air, how can firms spot and hire the few candidates that will thrive in Big Law instead of wasting time and money on people like me?Another way to get rid of the bad emotion is to play game. When you play Diablo 3, you won’t think about other things. You will be addicted into the games. And you want to buy diablo iii account, and where to sell Diablo 3 account. In the game, you can think about something similar and think out the things. You can buy d3 gold in the farmer100 website.

Woldow says that smart firms are beginning to change their hiring standards, selecting candidates who will stay longer than just a few years and who, upon making partner, will bring in their own business.

According to Heather Frattone, associate dean for career planning at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, this means that firms are looking for more than just exemplary report cards. Depending on the firm, "communications skills, project management, organizational understanding, drive, initiative, resilience, and entrepreneurship" are all sought after qualities in recruits, but different firms place varying levels of value on these traits.

Firm recruiters, Frattone adds, are beginning to ask more behavioral questions to identify candidates with the qualities they're looking for. "Things like, 'Tell me a time you were not successful at something you were working on, and what did you learn from that?'" These are the kinds of questions you might hear at any other interview. They just haven't had much of a role at law firms up until now.

But it's not enough for young lawyers to be smart, ambitious team players. Woldow advises looking for people with more life experience over candidates who went straight from high school to college to law school. "Maturity helps you roll with the punches a little more," she says. Candidates who have only worked within academia, who graduated at the top of their class, and are used to being lauded for their accomplishments often "don't understand that they're just the lowest of the low in a big machine." They have trouble taking orders, moving through Big Law's hierarchical structure, and putting in the required hours.

Psychotherapist Will Meyerhofer, a former associate at Sullivan & Cromwell and author of the legal blog The People's Therapist, thinks firms can keep associates around longer by only hiring people he calls "workhorses." These are the ones "who can just handle the brutal hours, who are very motivated by the money and making partner." He describes these people as "nerdy," "geeky," and "dorky," and with "fewer outside interests."

But while plenty of firms will happily snap up those recruits, Williams & Connolly regularly takes cases to trial and looks for attorneys who will not only make a positive impression on clients, but on juries as well. "Someone who can only talk on a purely theoretical, academic level, is going to be more challenged here," says Williams & Connolly hiring partner Meg Keeley. Instead, Keeley says, her firm seeks "someone who can make arguments on a practical and personal level."

about the business woman

The year was 1973. Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique had been out for a decade; Ms.magazine had published its first issue. Women were pouring into the workforce, hitting 40% of the total working population that year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Over half of married women with school-age kids held a paying job. And yet, as Fortune'sWyndham Robertson surveyed the world of big business in an April 1973 story, he had a question about this supposed female surge: "Where in blazes are they?"

A mere 3% of women in the workforce were "managers and administrators," according to the BLS, and, as Robertson wrote, "in jobs where visibility is greatest -- i.e. in corporate management -- women are seldom seen."I know a special job that is to play runescape instead of real player. They pay money to someone, and give some money to buy d3 gold and d3 gold. Using the money buys some equipment to upgrade and kill monsters. Do they know where to sell Diablo 3 account? They can visit the farmer100 website and they can do some transactions.

How seldom seen? Fortune looked at its list of the 1,000 largest industrial companies, plus the 50 largest companies in six non-industrial businesses. From this list of 1,300 firms, 1,220 had to file proxies with the SEC that provided information on the top three paid officers, and any director earning over $30,000 (equivalent to just shy of $160,000 today). Of the 6,500 names generated that way, a mere 11 turned out to be women. After subtracting a woman who appeared not to be closely involved in running her company, Robertson profiled the others in a piece called "The Ten Highest-Ranking Women in Big Business" that is notable both for showing what has changed in 40 years and, as importantly, what has not.

In 1973, it was almost impossible for a woman to work her way up the ranks to a leadership role. Robertson wrote that while the women on the list -- which included names such as the Washington Post's (WPO) Katharine Graham and Barbie creator Ruth Handler -- were "highly capable and hard-working executives," they also, with only two exceptions, "were helped along by a family connection, by marriage, or by the fact that they helped to create the organizations they now preside over. In short, most of them did not have to deal with at least two problems that have over the years held back even the most able and qualified women: They did not start out in their companies in jobs with limited futures, and they did not have to work their way through a corporate hierarchy that discriminated against them."

The irony of this was that "none of these women, obviously, has to work, and in fact some of them wouldn't have -- or wouldn't have had careers -- without the family tie-in." Dorothy Chandler of the Times Mirror Co., reported in her profile that, "If I had not been Mrs. Norman Chandler, I would not have had the opportunities I've had."

But, as Robinson wrote, "Each of them plays an effective and important role within her corporation -- an impressive bit of evidence that other female executive talent is going to waste."

Forty years later, this seems pretty apparent. Fortune's annual Most Powerful Women in Business list can easily rank 50 women vs. the 10 on the 1973 proto-list, and as Fortune noted in its October 2012 rankings, "While there are currently 19 female Fortune 500 CEOs ... the talent pool was so deep that two of them didn't make the cut."

Some of these 50 women climbed the harrowing ranks of their companies. IBM (IBM) CEO Ginni Rometty, for instance, joined the tech giant in her early 20s in 1981. That's a mere eight years after Robertson pointed out the "absurd" discrimination female executives faced, such as the Milwaukee Estate Planning Council's refusal to grant membership to Catherine Cleary, president of the First Wisconsin Trust Co. (and a member of Fortune's 1973 list), despite the fact that the $1.25 billion in assets under her management meant she was running the largest trust company in Milwaukee ("indeed in all of Wisconsin.")

What's also interesting is how similar some of the issues brought up in Robinson's 1973 article are to what's rehashed now.

Robinson dutifully informed readers that "Most of the women were able to combine careers with families. Six of them are married, and three are widows. Seven of those nine are mothers." But one key reason there weren't more women in leadership roles, Robinson wrote, is the view that careers and kids were incompatible. Indeed, "highly educated women are the ones who most frequently quit their jobs during the rearing of preschool children -- and they are presumably the women whose chances of advancement would otherwise be greatest."

And then there's the question of ambition -- whether women "leave before you leave" to quote Facebook (FB) COO Sheryl Sandberg. "Among these highly successful businesswomen there is general agreement that women's aspirations are still far too low," Robertson wrote.

"Women may get to the top of the heap at some low level, but they don't try to move up to the next plateau," said Tillie Lewis of Ogden Corp. "Somehow they're not inspired. Maybe they will be, now with women's lib."

Bernice Lavin of Alberto-Culver, whose profile noted that she took off a Marissa Mayer-esque one month when her three children were born and "has never felt that running a home made her paying job more difficult," reported that the women in her sales force did a better job than the men. But, writes Robertson, "she finds lots more women unwilling to take on responsibility and unduly fearful of making mistakes. She says 'A lot of girls want to be secretaries, and that's it.'"

the warning of the cold medicine

Despite safety warnings not to give sick toddlers cough and cold medications, almost half of parents in a recent survey are using the over-the-counter products anyway.

A poll released last month by researchers at the University of Michigan found that 42% of parents with children under the age of 4 gave them cough medicine, and 44% said they used multi-symptom cough and cold medications. A quarter of the parents said they used decongestants. The survey, which echoed some earlier studies' findings, arrives five years after the drugs' packages started including directions warning against their use in very young children.

Matthew Davis, a University of Michigan pediatrician who directed the survey, said he was surprised and concerned by the findings, which may show that parents aren't aware of the labeling and the history of worries about the drugs' use in young children. 'If you're a parent who doesn't know the story, you're going to think this [medicine] is for your kids, ' he says.

In order to upgrade, there are many tasks to finish in the Diablo 3. The player has no diablo iii account. And they will not buy buy d3 gold at present. Do they know where to sell Diablo 3 account? These non-members players will be how to improve level?  The task that is low requirements will be introduced, and it is suitable to the non members and the new players.

The medications came under close scrutiny in 2008, when the Food and Drug Administration advised that they shouldn't be given to children under 2. That came after an agency advisory committee the previous year said children younger than 6 shouldn't take the medications. The panel concluded there wasn't evidence that the drugs helped young children, while FDA safety officials had suggested some of the drugs were associated with side effects and some deaths, mostly in very young patients and often involving overdoses.

Manufacturers agreed to put warnings on the products' boxes that they shouldn't be given to children under 4 years old. These appear today on medications that include dextromethorphan, a cough suppressant, the expectorant guaifenesin and the decongestants phenylephrine and pseudoephedrine. Medications with antihistamines warn against use in kids younger than 6. The children's cough and cold products are sold under brand names including Novartis AG's Triaminic and Pfizer Inc.'s Dimetapp and Robitussin.

shopping with your friend

Shopping with friends may be bad news for your bank balance, but at least you'll get your money's worth.

Experts found two thirds (62 per cent) of women who trawl the shops with a female friend will spend more money than those who venture to the high street on their own.

Girls tend to fork out £37.25 more each time they go out with their friends than when they go alone.

The study also shows that over the course of one year ladies will spend up to £894 more than if they had gone on a spree unaccompanied.

The Internet not only has the physical commodity, but also has the virtual products. The phone card can be recharged into the telephone and mobile phone. The game card can also pay money. For example, buy d3 gold act as the money and exchange more cheap d3 gold. Or by paying on line, the player can be a diablo iii account. As to the player, that is wonderful. It is easy to find where to sell Diablo 3 account.

But it’s not all bad news, as two thirds of women feel more confident in the clothes they have bought if they have had the opinion of their friends while trying them on.

And the same percentage feels happier after hitting the shops in good company, than alone.

A spokeswoman for Liverpool ONE, which commissioned the study of 2, 000 women, said: 'Shopping with friends, while sometimes a more costly experience, can often be far more enjoyable than going to the high street alone.

Girlfriends are great to have around as they’ll happily help you choose something to wear, will love to help you accessorise and will give an honest opinion in the changing rooms. When shopping alone, it is easy to decide not to bother buying anything if you’re not sure whether outfits are complementary, and if your guilty conscience wins.

character test

When Frank Parsons opened the world's first career guidance center in Boston in 1908, he began by asking prospective clients 116 penetrating questions about their ambitions, strengths, and weaknesses (and how often they bathed). But then he did something more unusual: He measured their skulls.

Parsons was a committed believer in phrenology. If you had a large forehead, he might recommend you become a lawyer or engineer. But if your skull was more developed behind the ears, you were of the "animal type" and best suited to manual work.

Career advice has, thankfully, come a long way since then. But now, instead of measuring the outside of people's heads, it has become common to measure the inside using psychometric tests. Personality testing has grown into a major industry and is standard procedure in leadership and management courses, as part of job-interview processes, and, increasingly, in career counselling. But should we really trust such tests to deliver scientific, objective truth?

They usually bought d3 gold with the RMB. To buy d3 gold, they preferred less spending in the other aspects of life. They said that it did not matter because the cheap rs gold could purchase the special skill and increase the level. 

I have some bad news for you: Even the most sophisticated tests have considerable flaws. Take the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), the world's most popular psychometric test, which is based on Jung's theory of personality types. Over two million are administered every year. The MBTI places you in one of 16 personality types, based on dichotomous categories such as whether you are an introvert or an extrovert, or have a disposition towards being logical or emotional (what it calls "thinking" and "feeling").

The interesting -- and somewhat alarming -- fact about the MBTI is that, despite its popularity, it has been subject to sustained criticism by professional psychologists for over three decades. One problem is that it displays what statisticians call low "test-retest reliability." So if you retake the test after only a five-week gap, there's around a 50% chance that you will fall into a different personality category compared to the first time you took the test.

new ways of hunting a job in Danish

Steen Mengel was walking down a busy street a few weeks ago when he stumbled onto a sign reading 'an available academic is sitting here.' An arrow pointed to people sitting in the window of a storefront.

The 47-year-old real-estate developer didn't have a job to offer anybody, but he was intrigued. 'The idea, though, I like, ' he said, as he stood a few feet from the big picture windows framing the scene. 'It catches people's attention.'

Catching people's attention is exactly what more than a dozen job hopefuls in Denmark's capital are looking to do, even though they seem to be ripping a page from Amsterdam's famous red-light district to achieve their goal. After pounding the pavement for two years in some cases, highly trained professionals -- ranging from lawyers to former CEOs to tax experts -- are standing in line to get a seat in the 'exhibit.'

Diablo 3 is similar to the real society. It also has the various functions. And in the Diablo 3, roles also demand d3 gold as the money to buy what they need. Players buy d3 gold and exchange resource and skills. Do you know where to sell Diablo 3 account.

'I'm willing to try anything, ' said Hannibal Camel Holt, an unemployed political scientist, as he took his place in the window one afternoon. Armed with a laptop computer and wearing a dark blue button-down shirt, Mr. Holt has been 'kicking doors in and chasing leads, ' as he puts it, on and off for four years, striking out despite qualifications that include speaking six languages. For him, sitting-in represented a necessary, albeit awkward step.

'I feel like a monkey . . . in a cage as people walk by and just stare at me, ' the former tax ministry employee said as he sat behind a desk and occasionally glanced at passersby. After he had recently missed out on a job that had attracted 265 applicants, he realized that 'there comes a point when your CV is, like, dead.' A resume, in other words, doesn't necessarily do the trick.