Alvin Tan

Alvin Tan Yong Joon graduated from Singapore Management University’s (SMU) Juris Doctor Programme in 2014. He also holds a Bachelor of Business Management from SMU with double majors in Marketing and Psychology. He is currently Partner at Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP, and an adjunct faculty at SMU’s Lee Kong Chian School of Business (SMU LKCSB), teaching employment law with a commercial slant.

1. What were you doing prior to enrolling into the JD programme? What was your transition back to school like? Describe your experience reading the JD programme.

   At that point, I was a civil servant working in a central ministry. The job required me to analyse and review manpower and organisation development issues at a civil service-wide level. It was an exciting role – you got to review literature, conceptualise ideas and execute cutting-edge plans. I had been working there for more than three years before I enrolled.

   The transition back to school was not very natural for me. At work, we were learning and studying all the time. But the nature of that learning is very different from what law school teaches. Law school beats your brain into thinking about issues in a very methodical and organized manner.

2. Since you did your first degree at SMU as well, did you observe any similarities or differences studying as an undergraduate versus as a graduate student?

   There are some differences. As an undergraduate in SMU, apart from a handful of preassigned classes, you select your major and go on your way. You are generally not tethered to anyone. As a graduate student, you stick with your J.D. cohort for most of the programme save for electives. So, you tend to form close friendships. In the same way, if you cannot get along with people, you will feel the effects strongly. All this means you learn to work together in a professional manner, which is a very real reflection of the workplace.

   I also found class participation to feel more genuine, more reflective. I haven’t quite put a finger on why. Perhaps it is a mix of factors. It could be the class dynamic (my J.D. class’s dynamic was great), or perhaps being older, what you say matters more to you than the grade, and rightly so.

3. What would you say are challenges that candidates of the JD programme would face?

   Managing finances is a potential challenge. This is a full-time course and a demanding one. It is a few years of that and being older, candidates will possibly have higher financial commitments. Perhaps you need to save to get married and rent/buy a house. Perhaps you are expecting a baby. Perhaps you have aging parents. After graduating, it is another period of practice training and taking the requisite examinations, during which time you are not earning full income.

   This can all hence become a source of stress financially. But SMU does offer scholarships – partial or full – to selected candidates. There are also programmes at SMU allowing candidates to do part-time work, all of which help to ease this burden. I was a thankful recipient of all these.

   Age is another challenge. From the point of enrolment to starting legal practice in a law firm, it is at least three to four years, depending on how fast you complete the J.D. programme. There are also changes to the admission requirements, which I understand will slightly lengthen this process. As a society, we are relatively homogeneous, which means that candidates may think themselves “misplaced” if they subscribe to the belief that at so-and-so age one should already be in a certain phase of life.

   This can be more acute for mature candidates, who already have seniority pre-enrolment where they worked. For such candidates, they must be aware that they will be more junior in rank than their peers growing up, and that they will work in the law firm trenches alongside younger colleagues. I found this to be quite fun, as they tend to have more energy. But it is possible that some candidates can be uncomfortable with this, and must overcome it. I should add that in my observation, this isn’t a problem for most.

4. Would you say there are advantages that older candidates have in reading law?

   I find that mature students tend to be able to contextualise materials better. They bring with them some practical knowledge of how the commercial world works, and likely themselves better. Having gone through university before, they would have refined their own learning process and built on it. All these mean that what you learn get ingrained deeper.

   I do however remember remarks that we made to one another as fellow J.D. candidates, that we got tired so much more easily than during our undergraduate days. If you stay up the whole night studying for an exam, you may find yourself bouncing back to 100% much less slowly after.

5. What are your current areas of practice? How has the JD programme prepared you for the roles you are undertaking now? Would you say you have successfully transited to a second career?

   My current key areas of practice include competition and consumer protection law, trade law, environment / sustainability law, and employment law. Besides learning the law, I would say that the J.D. programme being as rigorous as it is, instils a certain discipline in how you plan and spend your time, and how you engage with your environment. Its design forces you to build certain habits quickly.

   In other words, the J.D. programme moulds you and prepares you for life after school, which to me is the whole point of education. The legal profession is tough, and you will meet difficulties. I do not think this is commonly said, but my sense is SMU's pedagogy prepares you on learning how to learn, as well as overcome.

   On the question on transition, I was called to the Bar in Apr 2015. I made partner in a local big firm in very decent time in Jan 2021. I teach employment law in the SMU LKCSB to aspiring HR professionals or otherwise candidates about to enter the workforce. By such measures, I would say, yes, it has been a successful transition.

   Yet my advice to potential candidates is not to think of “success” in such terms. Truly, it is not about promotions or titles. Perhaps we should see success as attaining a certain longevity and/or satisfaction serving the public in the legal profession (whether it is practice, in-house, public service or academia), or otherwise applying legal knowledge as a non-legal professional in other sectors.

   It is no failure to leave the legal profession in pursuit of something you want to do more. I stress that it is not possible to immediately conclude if your move is successful . It is only apparent that much later, after you look back at your decision to enroll in law school. So, do refrain from measuring the discrete parts of your career like that, which would be very hard on yourself. Life is an ongoing journey.

6. What advice would you give to prospective students who are intending to enroll into the programme?

   If you can, get a real sense of how much you like it. Ask yourself why? Is it interest? Is it money? Is it prestige? Can your objectives be met by being a lawyer? Forget the movies, which are wholly inaccurate. Talk to people in the industry. Do not just talk to the most senior people. There is naturally a survivor bias. Talk to people who left. Talk to the juniors as well. Get a fuller sense of the landscape, and a realistic sense of what it takes to stay the course the first few years, and what it takes after. In any event, it helps you mentally prepare ahead for the switch.

   Once you enrol, you may have second thoughts when things get tough. I received a solid piece of advice before school started. It was to never look back. This helps you stay focused. This means that you do not let yourself entertain thoughts that you should not have gone down this path. I am not saying that one should not constantly reassess our circumstances – we all must. I am saying to not be distracted by unproductive thoughts, thoughts that arise only because things are tough.

7. Give us a short spiel on why prospective students should join the JD programme?

   The J.D. programme is structured in a way that requires you to work closely and intensely with fellow candidates within very limited spaces of time for group assessment while having to balance individual assessments and personal life. It is a stressful process, but a good rehearsal for life as a legal professional. Your fellow candidates are equally brilliant people from different walks of life with different nationalities and careers, and would have very different perspectives. Experiencing diversity is important for a good legal education.

   You also have distinguished faculty who teach you. The weekly seminar system makes it easy to approach them to learn more than just academic knowledge. I remember one such conversation with Professor Lee Pey Woan (who taught me Corporate Law), who shared candidly with me her views on career, life and faith some ten years ago that particularly inspired me, which details I still revisit and reflect on every now and then as guidance.

   Obviously, I would not have first-hand experience about the law programmes in other universities, but having gone through and knowing SMU's pedagogical strengths, I would choose SMU all over again.

The views expressed above are the interviewee’s and do not represent the views of Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP