Blog Archives - Page 41 of 55 - Fleming Strategic

The Power of Nice

July 6, 2007/0 Comments/in Blog, Uncategorized /by strategic

I’ve been doing quite a bit of reading lately (a by-product of not being able to work using my own computer) and I’m enjoying the diversity of ideas that are coming through my selections. From the point of view of the stereotypical lawyer or law firm, the most subversive of these books is The Power of Nice, by Linda Kaplan Thaler and Robin Korval. The subtitle is, “How to Conquer the Business World with Kindness.” Makes you feel warm and fuzzy, doesn’t it — or is that the cold grip of skepticism?

The book’s rather unsurprising premise is that business success is facilitated by being nice. (I prefer the word kind to nice — perhaps because nice has become almost a backhanded slur.) The authors are in advertising, creating the campaign for the Aflac duck, among others. They offer 6 Power of Nice Principles:

1. Positive impressions are like seeds. In other words, being nice prompts a variety of untraceable positive effects.

2. You never know. You never know when being nice to a stranger will pay off — such as holding a door for someone as you’re both entering a building, only to discover that the person is your potential client.

3. People change. Be nice to everyone, regardless of social station or power. This principle is commonly known as, the feet you trample today may be the ones you have to kiss tomorrow.

4. Nice must be automatic. The story provided to illustrate this is that of a client who didn’t hire a particular consulting firm because an executive in the firm didn’t help her with her heavy bags when she arrived at the airport. Had nice been automatic for this guy, the authors argue, he wouldn’t have needed to remember to help a client but would have done for her what he would have done for anyone.

5. Negative impressions are like germs. This is the flip side of Principle #2. Nastiness begets nastiness.

6. You will know. Whether you’re nice or nasty, you face yourself in the mirror every morning and every evening. What do you want to see when you look into your own eyes?

So, perhaps none of these principles is rocket science. The remainder of the book provides tips on how to be nice without compromising what’s best for your business, plus “Nice Cubes,” which are small exercises designed to help the reader be nicer. One unintended benefit of reading the book is a reminder of the importance of story to getting a point across. When I sat down to begin writing this post, I had to look up the principles, but I could quote several of the authors’ illustrative anecdotes. Litigators, take note.

After I finished reading (which was only an hour and a half or so after I started, since the book is just over 100 pages), I started thinking about how the principles might apply for lawyers. It’s important to be nice to potential clients, and even more important to be nice to current and former clients, but that’s pretty much a no-brainer, right? (But what does nice entail here? Your answer is part of your “brand” as a lawyer. It’s worth some thought.)

What about being nice to opposing counsel? I hold that a lawyer may be nice/kind/amiable with opposing counsel without weakening his position. And fortunately, many lawyers have that skill. It’s the lawyers who don’t have it who make practice unpleasant. What would your interactions with opposing counsel look like if you were being nice without being weak?

Perhaps the most overlooked place for niceness is in interactions with our familiars: colleagues, staff, and even our own families. We justify being sharp and even rude because we’re pressured or stressed. (And I promise, I’m saying “we” because I do it too!) Some consultants and lawyers advise the use of an advance blanket apology (“when I’m rude later on this week, please know that I’m just stressed”), but I would suggest that’s a cop-out. Working relationships are improved by limiting the rudeness and by genuine, specific apology when necessary. Failure to take either of those steps damages working relationships. Being nice (which can be anything from saying “thank you” for a job well done to bringing in bagels for the team on occasion) builds relationships. It isn’t a panacea, but it helps.

And finally, I suggest that nice matters especially to job applicants. I’ve been rejected by a huge number of potential employers, and some of them stick out in my mind. I can almost list the law firms that didn’t even acknowledged my submission; I can definitely list the would’ve-been employers who were particularly kind in their response. And when I crossed paths with the hiring lawyer who wrote a rather nasty rejection letter, it was a real challenge to put aside that memory and to interact with her from a clean slate. She has a reputation as a good lawyer, but I have never and would never refer a case to her because I don’t trust that she would treat the client any better than she treated me.

It’s probably worth it to read The Power of Nice; it’s absolutely worth some reflection for each of us to consider how we might be nicer. I suspect that members of The Secret Society of Happy Lawyers harness the power of nice on a regular basis. How about you?

Independence Day: what does it mean for lawyers?

July 4, 2007/0 Comments/in Blog, Musings /by strategic

To those of you in or from the U.S., Happy Independence Day!

Today’s a day that many celebrate with cookouts, fireworks, parades, and the like. I’ve had an interesting lead-in to the holiday through conversation with my husband’s parents. They live in England, though they spend a great deal of time now in the U.S. Their recent questions about what exactly we celebrate on the 4th of July and most especially what’s happening in American politics prompted me to give some thought not only to what’s going on in our country, but also how we as lawyers experience and contribute to our national conversations.

A number of years ago, a prominent criminal defense lawyer (think Matlock) visited the firm where I was working to talk to us about the Patriot Act and to urge us to be educated on the issues, to educate others, and to play a role in unwinding the Act and the laws associated with it. I appreciated his vigor, and I was moved by his passion. And then I returned to my desk to bill some more hours. I was not alone. The pressures of practice demand attention, and lawyers are conditioned to respond.

But what else is important?

Though my coaching engagements always begin with a client’s interest in a particular issue or aspect of her life, very often the conversation expands beyond that single focus. We often look at not only professional goals and issues, but also at personal desires and family concerns. We address community involvement as a part of business development conversations. And, on occasion, we explore broader issues such as whether, what, and how this individual may choose to contribute to our society, perhaps through pro bono work or speaking or political activity.

I have recently become certified in leadership coaching, in part because I believe that lawyers are leaders not only within a practice area or a firm, but also in society. Sometimes by design, and sometimes by default. My mission is to support lawyers in stepping up to leadership — beginning first with themselves, and then reaching outward as far as they wish. My writing usually center on personal or practice-based leadership, but today is a good day to open up the question to a broader scale.

And so, my question today is this: what responsibility do we bear, both as citizens and as lawyers, to step up to the issues facing us today?

Recovering from a computer crash

June 28, 2007/4 Comments/in Blog, News /by strategic

Apologies for my silence of late. While traveling last week, one of the Windows files necessary for start-up mysteriously vanished. “It just happens,” say the tech support people, which is no consolation to me at all. After trying every trick in the book, including mystical incantations, I finally wiped the hard drive yesterday. I’m back running, though not nearly back to normal.

Happily, I was able to put in a good bit of work on Blawg Review #114 before the crash. Stephanie West Allen put in yeoman’s work in bringing it home, and it appears in full glory on her Idealawg. I have a new respect for those who host the Blawg Review. Blawg Review has information about next week’s host, and instructions on how to get your blawg posts reviewed in upcoming issues.

And with that, I’m back to rebuilding my computer. This is my second crash in six months (the last, which occurred on December 26 while I was flying from Atlanta to San Francisco, was a hardware issue) and I’ll be restoring my files from an online back-up service. I’ll let you know how it goes, since I will be promoting the gospel of backing up from now on!

Coming soon: Blawg Review #114

June 21, 2007/0 Comments/in Blog, News /by strategic

Today is the summer solstice, the longest day of the year in the northern hemisphere. I once had the joy of being on a Norwegian milk boat headed to the North Cape on June 21. As we traveled northward, we could see the bonfires lit on the shore to mark the solstice. It was one of those amazing moments in which everything was in flow, when the familiar, the new, and the timeless all intersected, and summer was born.

Stephanie West Allen of Idealawg and I are collaborating to host Blawg Review #114 next week, and we look forward to heralding the summer season in the legal blogsphere. We’ll probably have some familiar posters as well as some new ones, along with ideas both timeless and fresh. What sunny (or stormy) posts will find their way to us on the first summer breezes of 2007? Please submit your own favorite blog post or some you’ve discovered during the past week! You can find the Blawg Review Submission Guidelines and a handy submission form here. The deadline is 11:59 PM PDT on Saturday — but there’s no need to wait.

Stephanie notes that Blawg Review #61 was also a collaborative effort, by Blonde Justice, Woman of the Law, and Not Guilty. We look forward to introducing the latest team effort next week!

Networking technique: bring a friend along

June 18, 2007/0 Comments/in Blog, Client development, Coaching for lawyers /by strategic

For those who hate networking, walking into a room as part of a team may increase comfort and confidence. The real beauty of this approach lies in having someone who knows you ready at hand to trumpet your skills — in other words, to introduce you glowingly (and truthfully) in a way that would come off as bragging if you do it yourself.

Here’s how it works: you and your colleague split up and circulate. When you see your colleague in conversation with someone, you join them, and your colleague introduces you by referencing your background, your accomplishments, and what a great person you are — “Barb, meet Joe. Joe’s an associate in my firm, and he’s doing terrific things for us. Just last week, he argued a tough discovery motion in front of Judge Smith and not only won, but got our fees as well. He’s a real go-getter, but I guess that’s what they teach at University of Fantastic, you know?” (Of course, you should make sure that your buddy knows enough about you to tailor her introduction of you to the interests of the person you’re meeting.) Following the introduction, you pick up the conversation and, after an appropriate time, your colleague drifts off to meet someone new. You’ll want to return the favor for your buddy, and if applied well, you can make much deeper connections ripe for a follow-up using this method than you might by yourself.

From a coaching perspective, the questions to consider are these: how would you like to be introduced? And what do you need to do on a regular basis to merit the introduction you desire?

Long-term career options

June 15, 2007/0 Comments/in Blog, Coaching for lawyers, The practice /by strategic

When I finished law school in 1993, the expectation of joining a firm, making partner there, and staying for the entirety of a career was beginning to fade. By this time, it’s almost an anomaly for a young lawyer to walk that path. In 2006, a NALP study (reported in a Law.com article titled Firms Losing Top Talent to Clients) showed that 19% of associates leave their firms after their first year in practice, 40% leave by their third year, and 78% leave by their fifth year. Where the departing associates go varies, of course — some to other firms, some in-house, some outside the law entirely. But the bottom line is that for the majority of large firm associates, becoming a homegrown partner is no longer the presumed outcome of joining a firm as an associate.

The often-repeated “joke” that partnership is like winning a pie-eating contest only to find that the prize is more pie may well cast light on why the career path has changed so dramatically. Equally likely is the emphasis on profits-per-partner and the rising level of what’s an “acceptable” profit. Whatever the reason, an associate is well-advised to consider early what path she’d like her career to take. Although the paths don’t necessarily diverge completely (because, for instance, building credibility and respect with colleagues and clients pays dividends regardless of which career path the lawyer selects), it’s possibly to think strategically toward a goal only if that goal is clear.

This month’s Law Practice Magazine is one of the best resources I’ve seen recently for hitting the highlights of the career route decision in short firm. Articles include Making Partner — or Not: Is It In, Up or Over in the 21st Century? (reviewing modern alternatives in law firms to the old rule of make partner or get out), Is There Life After Law Firms?: Getting Off the Partnership Path (reviewing some options outside law firms), Going In-House? Prepare for Culture Shock and Partnership Criteria: The Ground Rules of Moving Up (criteria and issues involved in making partner). Also included are two articles written by lawyers who’ve chosen careers outside the practice: From Antitrust Lawyer to Executive Coach (written by Deborah Katz Solomon, a remarkable coach whom I’m delighted to call mentor, colleague, and friend) and From the Courtroom to the Classroom (the story of a lawyer who has moved to teaching after 25 years in practice).

While the articles included are probably not sufficient to inform career decisions fully, if you’ve been considering your long-term career plan, this issue is a must-have. For newer lawyers who have perhaps been drifting along and hoping for the best, this issue will help you think strategically and clearly about what you want from practice and what you’re willing to put into it. It’s great weekend reading. Enjoy.

Addressing burnout: your productivity depends on it

June 13, 2007/1 Comment/in Blog, Time management/productivity, Work/life balance /by strategic

Because of the stress of practice, burnout is a real issue for lawyers. Just about every lawyer has at least an occasional period in which it seems that work is pressing 18-20 hours a day, and most of us know intuitively that it’s important to recover following that kind of exertion.

But what about the kind of day-to-day grind that can cause low-level burnout?

As an analogy only (and not as a diagnosis) compare major clinical depression with feeling down. According to mental health professionals, the symptoms of the two are similar, but minor depression (feeling blue, dysthymia, etc.) tends to last longer and be more mild than major depression. Where major depression is marked by an inability to function, someone who’s feeling down often sees the world in shades of grey, doesn’t enjoy life like he used to, and has reduced energy, but he’s still able to function.

Chuck Newton has recently posted on the “Cure for Lazy Lawyer Syndrome.” It’s a terrific article that describes with a visceral clarity what it’s like to struggle with low-grade burnout:

You know something is wrong. You intend to get into work early to catch up, but fail to do so. You just cannot seem to make yourself finish that brief that is due in a week. You avoid phone calls you know you should take. You take a phone call and you know should make a note, but you just cannot make yourself get around to it. Then you forget the necessary details. You know you should call your client, but it is so-o-o-o inconvenient. You start to feel overwhelmed and you cannot find a starting place from which to even begin to catch up. You are just feeling tired, depressed and rundown. Vitamins do not seem to help much.

Does that sound all too familiar to anyone else? I’ve certainly been there, and I’ve talked with enough clients to know that it isn’t an isolated feeling — though lawyers who are feeling this way do tend to isolate themselves. And that tends to add self-condemnation to the mix, and the result is not pretty.

But Chuck has a solution, and he’s hit the nail right on the head:

My suggestion is that you will feel better about yourself, your practice and your competence if you will concentrate harder on the practice of law for shorter periods of time. When you are in the zone, be in the zone. Focus, but not so long that you get eye strain.

***

Short times away from your work (and I mean absolutely disconnecting from your work) will help you to be more productive and energetic back at your work.

Chuck’s post appears on the Solo Lawyer blog, and he even emphasizes that this advice is especially important for “home office lawyers, connected lawyers and Third Wave lawyers.” To my mind, it’s critical for all lawyers, especially since most of us are now “connected” most of the time. Although some of the suggestions that Chuck makes are difficult or inappropriate for lawyers who work in a traditional law firm (i.e., working 4-day weeks on a regular basis, absent a part-time schedule), the idea of short periods of intense focus alternating with period of complete disengagement can be applied in any practice setting. I’ve referenced the book The Power of Full Engagement before, but I’ll mention it again now because it stands for the proposition that “full engagement” requires selective disengagement from work — which is, after all, exactly what Chuck espouses.

The risk of low-level burnout is that it makes everything less pleasant; it leads to reduced energy, reduced efficiency, and reduced productivity; and if left “untreated,” it can lead to major burnout. My father, who’s practiced law since the mid-1960s, has given me much good advice, but one piece is especially relevant here. Make it a habit — an occasional habit, but a habit nonetheless — to escape from the office midday, whether it’s to see a movie, to visit a bookstore or museum, or to take a walk somewhere. Although the escape is great therapy to cure burnout, it’s even better applied to avoid it.

What’s your plan to address burnout?

Monday’s efficiency/productivity tip

June 11, 2007/0 Comments/in Blog, Time management/productivity /by strategic

Most of us start each day with a “to do” list, or at least a good idea of what must be accomplished. Time management experts often suggest starting by knocking off the easiest tasks, and overachievers often attack the toughest item first. However, each of these approaches misses the mark and may facilitate being busy at the expense of being productive.

Instead, I suggest starting each day with the most important task. It may be a phone call that takes 5 minutes or a drafting project that requires 5 hours; once that task is accomplished, though, the day has by definition been productive despite any crises that may pop up. The next step is, of course, to hit the second most important task.

*****

I’m headed back to Atlanta today, following almost a week in Dallas for a conference. Carly Fiorina spoke yesterday and had some interesting points on leadership that I’ll share in a future post. The question I’m left mulling is, how can lawyers in private practice show up as leaders? And how do lawyers in private practice show up as leaders?

What could a professional coach do for your practice?

June 6, 2007/0 Comments/in Blog, Coaching for lawyers /by strategic

Lawyers and law firms increasingly have the concept of coaching on their radar screens, particularly as coaching continues to filter into the mainstream. Now that the concept is well-known, the next step is gaining familiarity with how coaching actually works, what topics may be addressed, and what the effects may be over a given period of time. The ABA Journal has stepped up to offer case studies, in which it matched 3 lawyer clients (selected from more than 100 volunteers) with 3 coaches. The results offer tremendous insight into how a coaching relationship may function and the benefits that may result.

The ABA Journal offers three issues that stand between interested lawyers and coaching: uncertainty about what a coach might do for them, how to find the “right” coach, and how to find the time to engage in coaching. The three lawyers (Jamie Abrams, a 5th-year associate wanting to “sharpen her career management skills;” Larry Koch, a partner in practice for more than 25 years seeking to get more clients following the loss of a significant corporate client that was acquired by another company; and Frank Petrosino, a lawyer in practice for 9 years aiming to refine his area of practice) met with their coaches for one month, and the result are impressive.

Career management

The first lawyer/coach pair met by telephone two to five times a week. (By way of contrast, I talk with most clients twice a month, and almost never more than three times a month.) The engagement began with an assessment that helped the associate to identify her strengths and to facilitate her growth, particularly in delegating work. The lawyer said that working with a coach permitted her to reach for opportunities more effectively because she was prepared, and also that the coaching allowed her better to articulate her value to the firm and to develop practice goals for the next year.

Client development

The second pair spoke weekly for an hour at a time. The engagement began by defining the state of the lawyer’s practice, including naming his key clients and clients who hadn’t terminated the relationship but also hadn’t given him any work recently. The next step required evaluation of the lawyer’s current client relationships and how well they were functioning. Coach and lawyer also explored the lawyer’s comfort level in business development activities — avoiding the hard sell, for instance, preferring instead to continue an organic client development path by seeking new opportunities to help clients. These steps yielded a plan composed of practical goals (taking someone to lunch, for example) with deadlines. The lawyer’s summary of the coaching engagement: “I think most people need this type of assistance-someone to help them with planning, execution and accountability,” Koch says. “Especially with activities that don’t come naturally and for which you haven’t been trained. . . [It] made me think about other relationships, other possibilities-and then take a disciplined approach to it all.”

Sharpening a practice area focus

The third lawyer wanted to “become the go-to lawyer for the Vermont hospitality industry.” During the five calls of this coaching engagement, the lawyer identified his areas of marketing strength, refined those to be maximally effective, gathered data on the target client market, developed support within his law firm for going after his target clients, and came up with a strategy for setting aside time to continue his efforts. Between the first and second calls, the lawyer arranged several lunch appointments and speaking engagements, and he even managed to sit in on a client’s management meeting. Reflecting on the coaching experience, the lawyer said, “Obviously I have a full plate at work that I need to get done, but David’s calls gave me motivation, encouragement and energy that maybe I wouldn’t have had if he wasn’t there cheering me on.”

Conclusion

It appears that each of the clients came into the engagement highly motivated and willing to make the effort necessary to see results. Although coaching engagements are occasionally as short as a month, they usually last in the 3-6 month range, and not infrequently they continue much longer. However, the ABA experiment is a terrific example of what can be accomplished even in a very short period of time. The unspoken question, of course, is whether any or all of these three lawyers would hire a coach on their own dime. I am admittedly biased — since I am a coach for lawyers and since I’ve also been a coaching client for my legal practice — but the lawyers’ comments suggest to me that they did find significant value.

Two questions that the ABA Journal story raised but didn’t address: how to find the “right” coach and how to make the time. Making the time does require commitment, of course, but I’ve found that the stronger the motivation to make a change, the more likely the lawyer will set aside time for coaching (and the related work) and hold that time sacred. The “right” coach will vary among clients, but I always suggest investigating a coach’s background, experience, and coach training; the next, and most important step, is talking with a coach to get a feel for the coach’s style and personality. Most coaches offer free consultations before beginning an engagement, since the “chemistry” is important.