“She stabbed me in the back!”

/0 Comments/in , , /by

I’ve sometimes talked with lawyers (especially associates at large firms) who believe that another lawyer has stabbed them in the back: withheld critical information, misrepresented some aspect of the lawyer’s work to a more senior lawyer or client, or taken credit for the lawyer’s work.  These experiences are enraging and painful, and it’s easy for an affected lawyer to become suspicious of colleagues as a result.

Surviving and getting past such an event requires quick action.  First, the hard truth: whether the stabbing was intentional or purely accidental, your reputation is on the line and your response may well determine how others will see the situation.  Think quickly and dispassionately so you can find the best possible resolution.  Given the situation that currently exists (regardless of how it got there), what do you need to do to serve your client?  Take that step immediately and decisively.

Only when the client (internal or external) is fully protected can you return to the backstabbing itself.  The first step is to look unemotionally at what happened (ideally, with a mentor or unbiased assistant of some sort — certainly not someone who will agree with you regardless of the facts) and see whether this event really was a stab.  If you weren’t given important information, for example, look carefully to see what happened.  Perhaps the person who should have conveyed the information intentionally withheld it, or perhaps he simply forgot.  Is this event part of a pattern of behavior?  What does your intuition tell you?  How does your dispassionate observer see the situation?  Backstabbing does happen, but it’s critical to be sure that’s really what happened before you react.

Your next steps depend on whether what happened was done to you maliciously or negligently.  If malicious, consider (1) whether there’s any correction necessary and (2) what steps you can take in the future to avoid falling into a similar situation.  For instance, if someone assigned you work but left out a critical piece of information that caused you to present a memo, brief, or other product with a gaping hole in it, after you revise the work appropriately (to serve the client and to make the necessary correction), you might consider restating your assignments in a “confirmation” email to that person.  There’s rarely any point in confronting the malfeasor, unless you have incontrovertible evidence and are willing to pursue it to full resolution.  Generally speaking, your best response will be to note the problem, to work around it if possible, and to create avenues to avoid it in the future.

If the error was an accident (as, honestly, most are), consider whether a conversation could help to turn up a safety mechanism for the future.  Do you need to check in with that person on a regular basis to be sure you have the latest information, do you need to request to be a cc on all emails related to a particular case, or something along similar lines?  The trouble avoidance technique may be the same as it would be if the error were malicious, but conversation about an oversight is likely to be both productive and important to a good working relationship in the future.

In either event, if a third party (a partner or more senior associate, perhaps) is involved, you may need to have a conversation with her to clear the air.  Blaming the person who did wrong might feel good, but it won’t look good — so don’t do it.  Instead, address what happened on a factual basis and explain how you’re going to avoid a recurrence.

A word of warning: pay attention to your intuition.  A client once described to me a series of events that left him with an odd feeling about a coworker.  Although their interactions were professional and cordial, my client said that he always felt that his colleague would gladly “throw him under a bus” if need be to protect his own interest.  Unfortunately, his sense proved to be accurate; fortunately, my client had taken preventative steps to establish that he had provided certain information to that colleague.  Although 99.5% of the lawyers you work with are professionals with integrity, if your intuition signals that a colleague falls into the other .5%, take proactive measures right away.  Done with care, there’s no downside, and you’ll be protected if a problem ever arises.

How do you talk about what you do?

/0 Comments/in , /by

When you meet someone for the first time — especially in a social setting or at a networking function — how do you answer the inevitable, “What do you do?”  The tendency for a lot of us is to answer quickly, “I’m a lawyer.”  The person you’re talking with may inquire further about what kind of law you do or where you work, but it’s equally likely that the response will be something else entirely.  (One of my favorites is always, “Really?  You don’t seem like a lawyer!”  Is there a good answer to that?  I think not.)

So what’s a better response, especially with a view toward potential client development?  Prepare a 30-second commercial that explains what you do in a way that a non-lawyer would understand immediately.  I suggest lawyers answer 4 questions to create their commercial:

1.  What type of clients do you work with?
2.  What problems are those clients facing?
3.  What do you help them to do?
4.  What do they end up with?

So, a patent litigator might say, “I represent large companies that have or are developing a significant patent portfolio and have discovered an infringement. We work to target infringers, to negotiate a settlement where possible, and to litigate as needed so my clients’ IP rights are protected, they receive appropriate compensation for infringement, and their technical leadership is respected in the industry.”

By introducing yourself and your work this way, you’ll make it clear what you do and the person you’re talking with will know right away whether they need your services and whether they know someone else who does.  It also opens an opportunity for an interesting conversation about your work.  And, naturally, you can tailor your introduction based on the event and company you’re keeping.

How will you introduce yourself for maximum impact?

Blog bankruptcy

/4 Comments/in , , /by

One of the fundamental tenents of work/life balance, work/life integration, or any other name one might choose to describe the relationship between time applied on professional and personal matters is simple: conscious decisions on what to do and what to forego are mandatory, because no one can do everything.  My husband has a photo in his office that I truly hate, but it’s apt here.  It’s a picture of a trout with its mouth gaping open and a line beneath it that says, “Only dead fish go with the flow.”  It’s a recipe for disaster to “go with the flow” and assume that your work and your life will come to an equilibrium that suits you.  Careful choices are necessary, if painful.

This morning, I’m making such a choice.  It doesn’t rival choosing between attending a child’s annual recital and speaking at a prestigious CLE meeting, but it’s painful to me just the same.  I am declaring blog-reading bankruptcy.

Lawrence Lessig prompted this idea, by declaring email bankruptcy when he discovered that he was so far behind on emails he’d never catch up.  (Email bankruptcy Lessig-style is described in this Wired article that also has some handy productivity tips.)

I have so many unread blog feeds that I will never get through them — unless I choose to ignore what’s current, which would be a no-win “solution.”  I’ve tried to catch up.  I find so much value in the blogs I read that it’s hard to make the decision to clear the backlog, and yet, that’s the only rational choice at this point.  So, with apologies to the bloggers who work so hard to produce such excellent content, I declare blog-reading bankruptcy.  I start fresh today.

Where do you need to declare “bankruptcy”?  Perhaps in old industry newsletters or magazines, bar magazines that are interesting but not informative on your area of law, or newspapers/magazines?  Perhaps personal email correspondence?  Consider what “stack of stuff” is tugging at you from a corner of your desk or office or home.  Can you eliminate any of it, through “bankruptcy” or concerted action?

Book Review: The Happy Lawyer

/0 Comments/in , /by

This is a picture of where my “office” was yesterday: I’m on retreat, spending lots of time outside reading, writing, and thinking about my business.  Here’s a link to a post I wrote last year describing how you might engage in your own retreat, to review and evaulate how your practice is running and how it might work better.  I highly recommend an annual professional retreat, whether you choose to leave town or just spend a few hours in a closed-door session.

The book you see on yesterday’s “desk” is The Happy Lawyer by Larry Schreiter.  I’d been wanting to read it because of its description, “How to gain more satisfaction, suffer less stress, and enjoy higher earnings in your law practice.”  Who doesn’t want that?  The book is a quick 188-page read, full of exercises to help clarify the practice and the clients that will allow you to create a satisfying practice.  It then continues with suggestions on how to create that practice once you’ve identified it, how to attract the clients who will appreciate your efforts, and how to engage in a happy practice.  The bottom line is not terribly surprising, though I like the way it’s presented: to be a happy lawyer, figure out what you like about practice and then find ways to get more of that.

The exercises are the backbone of the book: there’s little point in purchasing this book unless you intend to complete  them.  Certain key concepts are identified, such as finding the “Seeds of Satisfaction,” “YES! Clients,” and “Arena of Preeminence,” but since every lawyer will find different parts of practice satisfying, different kinds of clients fulfilling, and different areas of expertise appealing, there are no shortcuts to the answers.  If you’ve ever considered coaching to support your developing a satisfying practice, this book is a nice middle ground.  Similarly, if you’ve purchased this or a similar book and not done the exercises (which are important, but not urgent), you might consider engaging a coach to help provide accountability and reflection so you can get to your answers.

Communications trouble? Maybe it’s you!

/0 Comments/in , , /by

I’m pleased to share  an article written by Annetta Wilson, one of the communications experts who will be leading the upcoming teleseminar Cut Through Communications Chaos.  Have you ever tried to have a conversation with a colleague or client only to discover that you’re talking at cross-purposes, with no middle ground you can find?  Read on…

Maybe They’re Not Crazy:  Maybe It Is YOU!

 

Not quite the headline you expected in an article about communication, is it? 

Okay, it’s a little misleading.  Sometimes, though, when we’re in a conversation that’s going in circles and getting nowhere, it can feel like we’re going crazy. 

Rest assured that you’re not losing your mind (unless, of course, you’ve been officially diagnosed).  It’s possible that you simply don’t recognize the other person’s communication style or know how to adapt to it. 

You have a communication style, too.  Think about your best friend, significant other or someone else in your life that you can talk to for hours and be completely in sync.  That’s not magic, it’s a style match.

There are some ‘magical’ beings out there that almost everyone can relate to.  Then there are the ones you want to run from when you see them coming.  That’s right: mismatched styles.

 

Before you pull out your label-maker, understand that there are no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ styles.  It’s simply a matter of what works in a given situation and what doesn’t.  

In what situation does your particular communication style fit perfectly?

Are you the ‘schmoozer’ who makes everyone feel at ease, even when it’s not YOUR party?

Or are you the ‘bottom line’ person who sees the big picture and puts everything in perspective?

Maybe you’re the ‘magical’ one everyone seeks out for sage advice and is usually the voice of reason.

 

Then again, you could be the ‘detail’ person who always makes sure that the data checks out, nothing is left to chance and who is happy to leave that ‘people’ stuff to someone else.

All are necessary.  All are different.  And all can be annoying if not put in the right role at the right time or the right setting!

 

Tip:  The next time you’re tempted to criticize or get upset with someone because they don’t communicate the way you do, ASK them how they prefer to receive information from you.

Detailed information in written form may make some people ecstatic, while others are perfectly fine with a quick verbal overview and just the highlights.

Someone else may need to socialize a bit before they can focus and get down to business.  Allow them that two to three minute window.

Remember to let them know how you want to be communicated with, too.

The point is, if you don’t ASK, you don’t GET.  If you don’t TELL them, everyone’s confused. Clarity beats ‘crazy’ any day!

Asking a simple question like, “What’s the best way to communicate with you?” can eliminate a mountain of aggravation and create untold opportunities to learn something new.  

 

©2007 Annetta Wilson Media Training and Success Coaching. All rights reserved.


About the Author

Annetta Wilson is a business strategist specializing in media training and presentation skills coaching. A talent coach for CNN, she has also coached for Walt Disney World. She makes it easier for high-profile individuals and teams to communicate more powerfully. Annetta is an award-winning journalist with more than 30 years experience in the broadcast industry, a Certified Trainer and a Certified Professional Behavioral Analyst.  

 

Visit her Web site at www.YourCoachForSuccess.com  

 

Inspiration for those considering a new career; can practice be easier?

/1 Comment/in , , , /by

One of the curious things about my coaching experience is that the topics that arise (with current and potential clients) seem to move in cycles.  Right now, the top two issues on which I’m coaching are (1) making partner (long-term strategy as well as short-term “beefing up” in preparation for the decision and (2) leaving the law.  For those thinking about leaving practice: the JD Bliss Blog has done some marvelous profiles of lawyers who’ve left the law for other pursuits, and I commend those to anyone who’s considering a move out of practice.  Nice inspiration, in short bites, for anyone wondering what might be next.

Meanwhile, for those committed to staying in practice (or at least not committed to leaving), here’s something for you to consider: can you create a practice that’s any easier for you than it is now?  This weekend, I was gardening (and by that, I mean tending parts of an unruly 1-acre yard) in 97-degree weather.  Adjusted for the high humidity, the heat index topped 107.  It was not fun.  I noticed two tendencies that made my work harder than it had to be, though: I was holding my breath every time I tried to pull out a large weed, and I was drinking a bottle of water only every hour or so.  Nothing would have made the work fun under the circumstances, but when I started breathing better and carried a large water bottle around the yard with me, it started being less unpleasant.  I also stopped yardwork entirely between 11 AM and 6 PM; had I not done that, I doubt I’d ever have been willing to set foot in the state of Maryland again!

What’s the practice analogy?  It’ll vary somewhat for each lawyer, but here are some examples:

**  Use the concepts of full engagement and selective disengagement for better energy management.

**  Make sure your office is arranged for maximum utility (good chair, good light, not cluttered, supplies and resources you need at hand, etc.).

**  Commit to raising your practice skills.

**  Identify the habits or tendencies that are detrimental and figure out how to turn them around.

**  If you goes through your days with a negative attitude, consider whether there’s an alternative.

**  Find mentors who can guide you through practice development, office politics, etc.

Leaving the law: how to start the next chapter

/2 Comments/in , /by

I recently had an opportunity to offer some suggestions to a lawyer who’s ready to leave the practice but uncertain where to start in creating the next chapter of her career.  Since that’s hardly an unusual state of affairs, I thought I’d post my comments here in hopes of helping others in a similar position.

Deciding whether to leave the law and what to do next requires examination of a wide variety of questions.  Some of the questions that I offer clients who are considering leaving practice include the following:

*  What do you want to bring from your legal career into your next career?  Do you want to be in a law-related field that will make specific use of your legal training, or do you want to explore something ocmpletely new?

*  What do you enjoy?  Writing, making presentations, working solo, working with a team, leading, managing, directing, etc.?

*  What are you passionate about?  Would you like to bring that passion into your work?  Another way of asking this is, for the sake of what are you working?

*  What do you want your days to look like?  Is work/life balance a significant consideration for you?  Imagine your ideal work situation and describe what it looks like — and really, you don’t have to know what the work itself would be to do this.  For instance, would you work in an office or from home?  Would you have an assistant?  Would your days be full of meetings?  Would you travel for business?  Would you spend time creating?  Would you spend time performing analyses or developing strategies?

* What has caused you to decide to leave practice?  (There’s often lots of information there, and some of the clients I’ve worked with have discovered that they don’t actually want to leave practice, they just want to change their practice so it fits them better.)

There are so many questions that merit exploration, and these are just a few starters.

I’d also suggest talking with others who’ve left practice and exploring books about career changes for lawyers, such as: The Lawyer’s Career Change Handbook (Hindi Greenberg), What Can You Do With a Law Degree?: A Lawyers’ Guide to Career Alternatives Inside, Outside & Around the Law (Deborah Arron);  Alternative Careers for Lawyers (Hillary Mantis); and Beyond the Big Firm: Profiles of Lawyers Who Want Something More (Alan B. Morrison and Diane T. Chin).  (Sorry, no links this morning, but you can find all of these on Amazon.)

You might also consider whether coaching could be beneficial.  Coaching is a useful way to discover what will work best for you given your skills and talents, your desires, and your needs.  A coaching relationship also creates a safe space to explore next steps with someone who “gets it” and, perhaps unlike family/colleagues/friends has nothing at risk based on your decisions.

Are you suffering from communications chaos?

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

Lawyers rely on good communications skills.  Whether it’s in writing or in person, how well a lawyer communicates will have a significant impact on her career success.  We spend a lot of time learning how to make effective, persuasive oral presentations in the context of practice, but what about day-to-day communications?  These examples illustrate the problems that can occur.

**  Adam Associate has just started working with Paula Partner.  Adam is a good lawyer with strong skills, but things just aren’t gelling in his working relationship with Paula.  Last week, Adam put together a memo illustrating some strategic decisions to be made for a client.  The memo reviewed the possibilities and included lots of data and details on each option.  When he gave Paula the memo with its attachments, she looked at it and snapped, “Adam, I need a bottom line.  What’s the game plan here?”  Adam began to review the options so he could give Paula the background necessary to understand his final recommendation, but he could tell she was getting more and more impatient.  Finally he cut his comments short and told her what he thought the client should do.  Paula thanked him, and after Adam left she sat down to do her own quick review of the situation.  A few days later, Adam was surprised to find out that she’d made a recommendation to the client that was a good approach but didn’t make use of the hard work he’d done.  Both Adam and Paula are frustrated, and Adam is wondering whether he’s in line for a negative (and unfair?) review since Paula clearly doesn’t appreciate his precision and thoroughness.

**  Paula recently made a pitch to Clinton Client over lunch, to represent his company in a huge merger.  She delivered clear though somewhat abstract information about her experience and the firm’s capabilities, and she presented him with an action plan that showed how she’d hit the ground running.  She was puzzled that Clinton kept throwing in new ideas that were far outside what she had contemplated, and she was annoyed that Clinton interrupted their conversation several times to speak to friends and acquaintances in the restaurant.  Paula had the feeling that Clinton knew every person who walked through the door and that he was intent on speaking to all of them.  He asked whether Paula or her firm represented any of the movers and shakers in his industry, most of whom he identified as friends.  Although Paula was willing to make a personal connection with Clinton, she wanted to move on to business and was frustrated that Clinton seemed to be more interested in telling stories and drawing analogies rather than sticking to the facts.

**  Adam was having trouble with Sue Secretary.  Although she had terrific skills, Sue always wanted to know more about the work she was doing and seemed to approach Adam’s practice as if she and Adam were a team.  Although Adam appreciated her interest, he didn’t particularly enjoy the “bonding time” of talking about family and personal interests, and he sometimes felt that Sue’s favorite word was “why.”  Sue couldn’t stand the organizational systems that Adam demanded and wondered especially why he needed his files to be identical, with the labels printed in a certain font and arranged according to the system he’d been using since his first year in practice.

Do these situations sound at all familiar?  Have you ever found yourself wondering why someone behaves they way they do or wished you could predict how they might respond to a situation?  I’ve been using an assessment known as the DISC with clients for over a year now to help explain and eliminate these communications problems.  DISC measures the extent to which you exhibit behavior and communication styles known as Dominant, Influencing, Steady, or Compliant.  Once you know your own style, it becomes easy to recognize other people’s styles, and that allows you to adjust your own style for maximum effectiveness in communications.  You can learn more about the DISC here, here, and here.

 

Saying “NO.”

/1 Comment/in , /by

Almost all of my coaching clients have said at one time or another, “I just don’t know how to say no.”  Whether it’s an associate or partner who’s so overburdened that she’s having trouble meeting her deadlines and/or producing an acceptable work product, a lawyer who’s bemoaning a difficult client and wrestling with how to screen clients in the future, or a lawyer who wants to establish strong boundaries to prevent his work from overruning his personal life, saying “no” emerges as a key skill.  But especially for lawyers in private practice, “no” can feel like blasphemy.

Often, part of our coaching work is to reframe what “no” means.  For instance, saying no to additional work when your plate is already full to overflowing is actually saying yes to the question, “Shall I meet my current deadlines and deliver a good product?”  Saying no to a client who’s clearly going to be troublesome (perhaps expecting unreasonable results, challenging every item on a legitimate bill, or being just plain nasty) means saying yes to reserving your time and energy for clients you can help who will faciliate and appreciate that service.  And saying no to work-related demands that burden personal time is critical for the selective disengagement that allows full professional engagement at the appropriate times.

The underlying step that makes this reframing possible is knowing what you want.  These examples are fairly simple, but clients of course face more challenging situations, such as taking on time-consuming work that will be demanding and draining but will give the lawyer an opportunity to shine within the firm and with clients.  When that’s weighed against a long-awaited vacation or even serving more routine client needs, the lawyer needs to know where her priorities are given all of the circumstances.  Billing heavily everyday for a month takes on different meanings at the beginning of a job, during an emergency situation, and during times of ordinary workflow.  Knowing where to set the boundary is critical to knowing whether a request oversteps that boundary.

Are you facing a situation in which you should say no?  What will you say yes to instead?

Conscious disregard of value: women vs. the legal profession

/1 Comment/in , , /by

One of the things I most enjoy about the blogosphere is the free exchange of ideas and thoughts.  Recently, Stephanie West Allen and I have been discussing a trend reported by Canada’s leading newspaper The Globe and Mail in an article entitled “Office Stress Ruining Women Lawyers’ Lives.”  (With thanks to Gerry Riskin of Amazing Firms, Amazing Practices, who offers his commentary.)  From the article: “Women at modern-day law firms are so petrified of appearing unproductive that they sometimes conceal cancer or heart attacks to avoid being marginalized.”  Stephanie’s comment on this trend is, “I find the behavior of the women who would hide serious health problems to be extremely puzzling, almost bizarre. Think of the statement that makes about their values. Why would they make such a trade-off? What is so important? Are we seeing zombies at law?”

I too find the reported concealment bizarre, though I would pin it as knowing, intentional disregard of one’s own value for the sake of… And then I can’t quite finish the sentence.  For the sake of looking sufficiently productive?  For the sake of being a “team player”?  For the sake of keeping a job that demands unrealistic sacrifices?  What job or profession could possibly merit the concealment of a serious illness?

The law has long rewarded “macho” behavior: working punishing hours, dropping everything to serve a client, exhibiting a mental and emotional toughness that’s impenetrable on the job — all without complaint.  Although commentators often focus on the challenges that women face in confronting those expectations, I find that a number of men are equally displeased about the sacrifices demanded.  Indeed, Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin of the Surpeme Court of Canada made the observation that, “The strict, inflexible business model is increasingly questioned by men. . . [the question for the future is] How do we structure the way lawyers — women and men – work; the way they live, the way they serve the public?”

While women face a more challenging uphill climb in some ways, as marked by the often-repeated statistic that on 17% of partners in large law firms are women, I find myself wondering whether we’re in a phase similar to one that existed before women were permitted to vote, in which women struggle to achieve “equality” acting in the context of  an underlying social sense that women will bring “civility” to the system, only to find that women are indeed as tough as men, though perhaps that toughness is expressed differently.

At the end of the day, the questions we need to ask about the profession are gender neutral, though we must also recognize that women of childbearing age face an extra layer of complexity.

Readers, are you aware of lawyers (of either gender) concealing serious illness to “avoid being marginalized”?  I welcome your comments.