The traditional on-campus hiring (OCI) system—long seen as the gateway to Big Law careers—is cracking under its own weight. What was once a structured, merit-based system designed to connect promising law students with elite firms has turned into a race of speed, status, and perks. Recent developments, including firms introducing entertainment budgets for recruits, reveal how far the process has drifted from its original purpose.
The “Entertainment Budget” Era: Flash Over Substance
A growing number of top law firms are reportedly offering law students entertainment budgets—stipends meant to enhance their social and networking experiences during summer associate programs. While these perks are presented as ways to give students more “freedom” or “authentic experiences,” critics argue they only highlight the misplaced priorities dominating modern recruitment.
Instead of focusing on mentorship, skill-building, or meaningful legal exposure, these programs often emphasize social events and curated fun. Students are encouraged to use their budgets on dinners, happy hours, or firm-sponsored outings. While the gesture may appear generous, it underscores a growing concern: hiring decisions—and even summer experiences—are increasingly being shaped by social dynamics rather than demonstrated legal aptitude.
This trend raises uncomfortable questions about bias. Students who fit neatly into firm cultures—those comfortable navigating social events, holding conversations with senior partners, or sharing similar socioeconomic backgrounds—may have an advantage that has little to do with legal skill. Those from less privileged or underrepresented backgrounds may find it harder to “compete” in a system that rewards networking flair over substance.
Speeding Through Recruitment: When Early Isn’t Better
One of the most significant problems with modern on-campus hiring is timing. Law firms now compete to make offers earlier than ever—sometimes before students have even completed their first full year of law school. These accelerated recruiting cycles pressure students into making life-changing decisions before they’ve had a chance to explore practice areas, gain real-world experience, or even understand their career goals.
Locking in commitments so early doesn’t just disadvantage students—it also hurts firms. When hiring decisions are made before meaningful work experience or academic performance data is available, both sides are gambling on incomplete information. The result is predictable: mismatches, higher attrition rates, and a loss of engagement once the initial excitement wears off.
The pace of recruiting has shifted focus from evaluation to branding. Firms are desperate to secure “top talent” early, while students feel they must commit before they’re left behind. This has created a market dynamic where prestige outweighs fit—a cycle that serves neither side well in the long run.
Prestige Over Practical Experience
The law firm summer associate program was once the centerpiece of legal training—a preview of firm life and a chance for students to show their skills in action. Today, it’s more often a high-budget marketing exercise. Students attend lavish events, dine at five-star restaurants, and receive top pay for limited substantive work.
Firms justify this approach as a way to attract talent in an increasingly competitive landscape, but the cost is clear. The emphasis on perks dilutes the focus on mentorship, professional development, and practical training. What’s lost in the process is what should matter most—building the next generation of capable, ethical, and committed attorneys.
For students, the consequences are personal and professional. Many find themselves entering firms without truly understanding the day-to-day work, the firm’s values, or the demands of particular practice areas. The result? Higher turnover, declining satisfaction, and a growing number of associates leaving Big Law within just a few years.
Reinforcing Inequities Through “Fit”
Perhaps the most troubling effect of this shift is how it reinforces existing inequities within the legal profession. When firms emphasize “fit” as a major hiring criterion—often assessed through social events or casual interactions—it tends to favor students who already share similar cultural, educational, or social backgrounds with existing firm members.
This dynamic perpetuates a lack of diversity and limits access for talented candidates from nontraditional or underrepresented groups. In a profession that continues to struggle with inclusion, the growing emphasis on perks, polish, and personality over substance risks undoing years of progress.
How Law Firms Can Course-Correct
If law firms genuinely want to build stronger, more inclusive teams—and ensure the longevity of their associates—they need to reimagine the hiring process. That starts with structural changes to on-campus recruiting:
- Extend timelines: Give students more time to develop academically and professionally before making binding commitments.
- Focus on substance: Replace superficial evaluations with real work experiences and meaningful mentorship.
- Increase transparency: Clearly communicate what qualities and skills firms prioritize during hiring, and make sure those standards are consistent across candidates.
- Eliminate bias in “fit” assessments: Shift away from socially driven evaluations and introduce structured, skill-based interviews.
- Invest in long-term development: Instead of entertainment budgets, allocate funds toward training programs, clerkships, or mentorship initiatives.
A System Ready for Reform
The current on-campus hiring model benefits neither students nor firms in the long run. By prioritizing speed, optics, and prestige, the process has drifted from its central mission: matching the right students with the right firms based on mutual professional growth and shared values.
Law schools, firms, and career offices must collaborate to rebuild the system into one that values merit, fairness, and transparency. Without such reform, on-campus hiring will continue to produce short-term wins but long-term discontent—for firms and future attorneys alike.
🔍 Looking for a job that truly fits your goals?
Explore exclusive, direct-from-employer opportunities on LawCrossing.com and take control of your legal career today.
See Related Articles:
•15 Top Law Schools: Best Program for Aspiring Lawyers
•Decode Law Schools Ranking
•Law School Profile
