Mishcon de Reya’s new AI chatbot interview draws mixed reactions from training contract hopefuls
Mishcon de Reya’s introduction of an artificial intelligence-powered interview tool has prompted a mixed response from students applying for the firm’s 2026 graduate recruitment round. The London firm has adopted a chatbot that conducts an introductory interview in a messaging style format, replacing its traditional application form for this stage of the process. The new system is being trialled and forms part of a wider move by firms to incorporate artificial intelligence into recruitment.
Candidates must still submit core information about their academic background, work experience and achievements. Once this has been provided, the AI program begins a conversational interview that asks tailored questions based on the applicant’s answers. Mishcon describes this as an opportunity for candidates to express their motivations and explain what they may bring to the firm.
Students have already expressed a wide range of views about the new approach. One applicant told Legal Cheek that many training contract candidates already spend significant time preparing tailored submissions for multiple firms and that the AI stage felt like an additional hurdle, particularly for those managing academic commitments and part time work. They said the process should reflect the same level of care that applicants invest in their submissions.
Embed from Getty Images
Another candidate took a more positive view. They acknowledged that the experience felt somewhat impersonal but believed they were able to convey their strengths effectively. They said the prompts to expand on incomplete or brief answers gave them a better chance to present themselves fully.
Several comments on Reddit criticised the system. Students described being asked similar questions repeatedly, encountering numerous sections to complete and spending several hours working through the chatbot’s prompts. One candidate said the experience felt draining, while others said it felt unfriendly to neurodivergent applicants. Some claimed the process seemed to misunderstand earlier answers and continued asking questions until it had gathered sufficient information.
Other applicants disagreed with this assessment. They explained that longer and more detailed responses reduced the number of follow-up questions and that the entire interview could be completed in a shorter period. They said the criticism circulating online did not reflect their experience.
Mishcon anticipated that candidates might raise concerns and provided fourteen frequently asked questions about the AI tool on its graduate recruitment page. The firm states that all applications continue to be reviewed by human assessors and that the trial compares human scoring with the AI’s output. It emphasises that fairness and risk mitigation guided the tool’s development and that every transcript will be reviewed manually during the trial.
Partner and training principal Daniel Lipman said the firm had worked hard to design a process that gives every candidate an opportunity to present their abilities clearly. He said many candidates had offered strong feedback, with almost three-quarters awarding the experience four or five out of five in a survey. Ninety-three per cent of respondents said the AI prompts felt personalised and relevant.
Bright Network, which developed the AI tool, said average satisfaction across all employers using the system was four point five out of five. It said it is refining the guidance on expected time requirements and adjusting the flow based on user feedback.