<p>Not sure what happened to my previous thread, but I had asked whether or not physical attractiveness plays a significant part in biglaw hiring and success? </p>
<p>I read from JD Underground that biglaw hires tended to be more physically attractive than those hired into document review positions at the same firm. One person went so far as to say he could predict whether someone was getting off on the biglaw associate's floor or the document review floor while in the elevator based on their appearance - the better looking people going to the associate's floors. </p>
<p>I’m not really sure what happened to that thread either. It’s nonsense that you can predict where someone will end up based on physical attractiveness. However, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t play a part. It does. There’s plenty of evidence developed by psychologists showing we are more inclined to like and trust attractive people. That can’t help but be a benefit in interviewing. That said, being pretty isn’t going to make up for being below median or going to a bad school. Like any other plus factor, it can help but it won’t be dispositive.</p>
<p>I’m guessing that this is largely about social class rather than beauty per se. Higher SES people are clustered at top law schools, where they generally become associates. Higher SES people are thinner. Also, the associates can probably afford to dress better, get better haircuts, etc., versus the contract attorneys.</p>
<p>But also, there is a lot one can control about physical attractiveness, including what you wear, how you take care of your appearance details and carry yourself. So many examples, so much advice, in this regard.</p>