I’ve seen few Tier I give consultant designation to hires. These are either majority in-house experience candidates or tier III law schools and law firms. What’s the reason?

Your question answers itself. When a candidate doesn’t fit the bill experience or background or quality wise, but they need hands, they try out. These hires don’t become the part of the regular growth or designation trajectory. That’s why most of these get frustrated, get the tag and leave in a few months time. The tag remains obviously. Hehe

Some get fired also in a few months. Tag’s the real free bonus for these ones.

Then please explain how does a person graduating from NLU Bhopal and then Columbia go from a Partner to being a Consultant at CAM.

Your logic is not logic-ing.

That’s the SBI ex chairman consultant category as written above. If I’m not wrong the OP is asking about associate level designation entry into tier I

Consultant at associate level - the comment is valid

Consultant at partner level - the comment is not applicable 👍🏼

I presume your question is not for hires like ex SBI chairman. If not - then the reasons are obvious. They don’t fit in so trial. Make shift.

Bump

They are not on standard employees and rest the comments explain

Many consultants out there posing as Associates on LinkedIn.

Don’t think so - because these Tier Is have consultant tags only and they would call out.

What matters to these people is the tier I tag in any case.

OP seems to be asking a career trajectory without hardcore law firm background at associate level to be consultant at a Tier I. The question to me seems to be on entry into a tier I without relevant experience. The senior level consultants who come as experts is a different trajectory I guess

Are these common trajectories?

BUMP