Interesting op-ed in this week’s National Law Journal:  How the Customer Metaphor Is Undermining Career Services, by William A. Chamberlain:

Law school career offices take pride in the level of service we provide for our students. So what could possibly be wrong with providing good customer service? … Should “happy” customers or well-prepared students be the goal of the law school career office? …

[T]he customer service model has led to a spiral of ever-increasing expectations that we cannot (and, in many cases, should not) fulfill. … The customer service model taken to its logical extreme raises questions such as these: Should students be able to come into our offices and say, “I’m paying $40,000 a year to come here, where’s my job?” Is a job earned or bought? Should they get their money back if they don’t have a job at graduation?

This approach is clearly not what we are about in our career offices. Students, as professionals-in-training, must learn to accept responsibility—not only because our programs cannot run if we are allowing constant exceptions for missed deadlines, but because it is our fundamental task to prepare them for life after law school—where there will be disappointment, where their happiness will not be at the forefront of anyone’s agenda, other than their own, where deadlines matter, and where they must take initiative. …

If not a job, what should students be guaranteed to get from the career office for their $40,000 a year? Certainly not “happiness.” If our goal is to make them happy, we have lost sight of our mission. Students certainly deserve support and encouragement, and the opportunities provided by on-campus interview programs, but, more importantly, they learn skills and benefit from the knowledge and wisdom of experienced counselors.