What restores your professional self?

I often write here about taking the time for real recreation and relaxation.  It’s important for all of us (lawyer and non-lawyer alike) to do something that refills the pitcher of “self” so that we have more to pour out in service to our clients.

But there’s another dimension to restoration, and that’s getting the professional self recharged and refilled.  Have you ever been to a CLE meeting that’s so full of exciting ideas and interesting people that you feel yourself swelling with delight?  Remembering that sense of why you became a lawyer?  Knowing that, even on the difficult days, your decision was correct?  If not, you owe it to yourself to seek out that kind of experience.

Last Friday, I attended the annual conference of the DC chapter of the International Coach Federation.  (For those who are unaware, I split my time primarily between Atlanta and Orlando, but I’ve also elected to remain part of the DC coaching community following my completion of Georgetown’s Leadership Coaching certificate program.)  Make no mistake, I am delighted with my work as a coach on a daily basis.  And yet, attending this meeting popped my excitement to the next level, fueled my desire to learn and do more, and reignited by commitment to bringing the best of my self, my skills, and my experience into every coaching interaction, all in service to my clients.  It was an incredible day, and echoes of it will show up here over the next few weeks, I’m sure.

Several topics grabbed my attention sufficiently to share them here, albeit in shorthand.

First, sustainability.  I attended a program that asked how those of us who coach leaders can bring sustainability into the equation, and I expected to hear about personal sustainability.  Instead, the presentation addressed environmental and social sustainability.  I left mulling over what it means to be a citizen, personally or corporately.  I have an inchoate sense that there’s a role for lawyers beyond legislation and even beyond pro bono work… But I’ll tease that out over time.

Next, Marshall Goldsmith, executive coach extraordinaire to CEOs of companies such as Glaxo SmithKline, Ford, and many others, spoke about “feedforward” as opposed to feedback.  Rather than focusing on what’s happened in the past — which is, by definition, unchangeable — Goldsmith recommends a forward-looking process in which the subject selects a behavior to change and solicits suggestions on how that change might be accomplished.  The exercise is positive and forward-looking, and regardless of what idea is set forth to facilitate the changed behavior, the only acceptable response is, “Thank you.”  It’s a terrific process, and I commend the linked article to you for more information.  Can lawyers implement a feedforward process?  Hmmm, more to come on this.

And I attended a presentation on leadership in the context of advancement.  Perhaps you’ve seen the recent statistics showing the 40% of newly-promoted managers and executives fail within the first 18 months.  Scott Eblin spoke on his book The Next Level: What Insiders Know About Executive Success, particularly highlighting what behaviors will support leaders and which will undermine them.  There’s much more to say here as well.

Throughout the day, I met coaches with diverse specialties and training/experience.  Wonderful conversation popped at every turn.  And although I’d had only 3 hours of sleep the night before, I was energized by the day.

So… Where can you find professional reinvigoration?  How can you build it into your schedule?  Perhaps there’s a magazine that feeds your professional self?  Or a CLE topic, possibly directly related to your area of practice or possibly not, that stirs new ideas and excitement?  Perhaps it’s the pro bono work you do, research and writing or speaking, or simply meeting with colleagues for conversation about wide-ranging topics?

Next time you notice yourself feeling more energized professionally, notice what’s created that for you and notice the results it yields.  Chances are that you’ll find it develops you as a better-rounded lawyer who’s more committed to your profession and your clients.  It’s a win-win situation that deserves to be cultivated.

Networking: the top activity for business success.

I’ve noticed that summer associate season is in full swing — not only because clients are mentioning their summer programs, but because I’m seeing more and more summer associate-related searches that people have entered before landing on the Life at the Bar blog.  So, it’s time for me to trot out my favorite topic not just for summers, but also for new associates and even long-time lawyers: networking.

Why is networking my favorite topic?  Because no other single activity has the potential of networking.  A network is a resource for business development, for future employment, for getting the help you need from other professionals, for developing an ad hoc advisory board for your career, for plugging into the grapevine for business news, and for fun and social activity.  (I met my husband at a networking event, as a matter of fact.)  Many people hate the idea of networking because it has a reputation for requiring pushy behavior, but the great news is that good networking is about meeting people, developing relationships, and seeking to serve.  And the key point is that a network must be cultivated over time.  There’s no time like the present to start building your network — and if you wait until you need the resources a network can offer, you’re too late.

Bruce Allen of The Marketing Catalyst blog has a terrific 7-part series on networking.  Start with his Idea #1 and follow the consecutive days to read the whole series.  My favorites are #3 (how to handle the lull when standing alone at a networking event, with no one to talk to, and facing the desire to flee the event) and #7 (how to make sure to do the follow-up that creates the opportunity for a networking meeting contact to grow into a business relationship).

If you’re interested in some of my previous posts on networking, they’re collected here.

Are you busy — Or productive?

One of the most important pieces of coaching rests in illuminating distinctions.  I have several favorites that come up in the course of a great many coaching engagements: reaction vs. response, hearing vs. listening, assertion vs. assessment, interesting vs. purposeful, and so on.  One distinction is particularly relevant to effective action: busy vs. productive.  My favorite definition of busy is “full of or characterized by activity.”  Another definition of busy (often used as in a pattern or design, but still relevant here) is “cluttered with detail to the point of being distracting.”  Hmmmmmm.  Productive is, of course, derived from the verb to produce, and my favorite definitions of to produce are “to create by physical or mental effort” and “to bring into existence; give rise to; cause.”

As I’ve written before, I think we live in a culture that embraces busyness and has made it a virtue to be busy.  And yet, I’m taken by the idea that being busy can mean being “cluttered with detail.”  I’ve certainly found myself there: researching something that’s of tangential relevance to what I’m doing, so that at the end of the day I’ve worked hard all day long and accomplished… Well… Not much.  But it’s an easy trap to slip into, because it feels good to be busy.

I once had a conversation with a colleague about billing.  He said that he’d spent an entire hour staring out of his office window and thinking about a case, and he came up with an approach and strategy that simplified a difficult issue, one that substantially increased the client’s chances of success.  His conundrum?  How to bill for time spent staring and thinking — as well as how to find more of that time and how to protect it since he didn’t appear to be “busy” but he was in fact very productive.

The law actually recognizes this distinction in billing rates.  A 1st or 2nd year associate is billed at a lower rate than a more senior associate or partner because (among other reasons) experience teaches a lawyer how to use her time most productively; the work accomplished in an hour by a senior associate is almost certainly more useful (i.e. more productive) than that accomplished in the same hour by a new associate.  And yet, both may appear to be equally busy.

When someone describes working a lot without getting the results he wants, I often suggest he ask, “Am I busy, or am I productive?”  The question is an adjunct of the Quadrant II time/priority management system that Stephen Covey teaches, and it takes that system to the next level because the question makes manifest the danger of working on an important task without being productive.

This question is particularly appropriate for practice/career management issues.  For example, in the course of a job search, is it busy or productive to spend hours reading ads on a job board?  The answer likely depends on the board and on whether there’s follow-up to an ad of interest.  It’s also appropriate in substantive practice at times, to question whether certain activities are productive or whether they’re just generating work.

So, consider devoting a few minutes today to checking over your task list, or to reflecting on how you spent your time last week, and ask… “Am I busy, or am I productive?”

How can your practice become known?

Do you ever feel that you’re just one small lawyer in a large sea?  New lawyers often begin their practices wondering how to distinguish themselves from the hundreds or thousands of other lawyers occupying the same niche.  And that feeling isn’t limited to new lawyers, by any means.  Though the question may fade, it certainly re-emerges when a lawyer is preparing to grow her practice or is considering some shift in substantive areas.  Clients are necessary for maintenance of a profitable practice, obviously, and differentiation can help to attract clients.  So, how can you differentiate yourself?

Blog (but check your state’s ethics rules first).  My background is in patent litigation, and I often referred to the Patently-O Blog by Dennis Crouch.  Patently-O is known for, among other things, its full coverage of every patent case decided by the Federal Circuit.  It became the go-to reference for what’s going on in patent law, and I’d venture to guess that an amazingly high number of patent lawyers and “civilians” who are interested in patent law read the blog on a near-daily basis.  I was astonished when I learned that Dennis started the blog less than a year after being admitted to practice.  He’s since moved on to academia, a move that was quite likely assisted by his blogging efforts as well as his other credentials.

A number of lawyers who blog boast that they attract clients largely through their blogs, and Kevin O’Keefe (a lawyer who has turned to assisting other lawyers with Internet marketing through lexBlog) is known for the trademarked assertion that “Real Lawyers Have Blogs.”  (And, of course, Kevin has a blog as well.)  Perhaps it’s a bit of overstatement to say, “blog it and they will come,” but it isn’t a bad starting point since blogging provides a platform through which a lawyer may share resources, analysis, and enough personal content to become known to readers.  How to do that is, of course, well beyond the scope on this blog.

A word of warning, though: ethics rules absolutely apply to blogging, and some states (most notably New York, amidst much controversy) consider blogging to constitute lawyer advertising.  If you’re going to blog, get educated about the ethical issues first.

Create a unique experience for your clients.

What can you offer clients that other lawyers don’t?  The opportunities vary widely by practice area, but any value-added service is a good step toward differentiation.  Don’t overlook the basics that may set you apart (though they shouldn’t): quick responses to phone calls and emails, regular case updates, or offering educational resources as necessary (i.e. on how to prepare to give deposition/trial testimony, what to consider when getting ready to make estate plans, etc.).  And consider introducing your client to every member of your legal team who will be involved with the representation.  Even something as quick as an introductory letter identifying other lawyers, paralegals, and office assistants that is signed by each can offer a client comfort when contacting your office.  Consider, of course, what is appropriate for your practice: what will impress a personal injury client may be radically different from what will impress the CEO or general counsel of a multi-million dollar corporation.

Be active and visible in the community.

I’ve written about networking in the past and explained that networking is really about building relationships.  Being active in the community — volunteering, serving on boards, working with non-profits in other capacities — is a terrific way to become known.  It provides a context for networking that often makes it more comfortable for reluctant networkers, and it may present you the opportunity to offer guidance and suggestions that will reflect well on you as a lawyer.  Moreover, you may have opportunities to speak or write through these channels, both of which will raise your profile.

Be clear about what makes you different.

If you want to differentiate yourself from other practitioners, it’s imperative to connect with an internal compass that will point to what does indeed make you different.  If you don’t know what that is, you certainly won’t be able to convince anyone else.

When the words just won’t come.

Have you ever had the experience of sitting down to write something important, having a rough idea of what you wanted to say, and yet finding yourself so tired or so distracted that you have significantly reduced ability to get the writing done?

I’m not talking about ordinary writer’s block or waiting for a muse to rest on your shoulder — that’s a luxury rarely available to lawyers.  What I’m describing is the temporary inability to draft something that’s reasonably straightforward in a way that accomplishes a workmanlike goal.  What can you do to jar the words loose?

1.  Take a break.  Get up from your desk, get the blood moving, get a change of scenery.  There is little more disheartening or un-motivating than staring at a blank screen (or pad) and searching for the words you need.  I strongly suggest not reading or trying to write, because that’s just more of what’s challenging you in the moment.  Get a cup of coffee, walk around the block (or at least around your floor), or close your eyes and listen to music that energizes you.

2.    Map your approach.  Sometimes the problem is having an idea that’s not yet sharp enough to reduce it to paper.  In that instance, try creating a map.  Write the core issue in the center of a blank piece of paper, then write related words or symbols around it and connect them to the main issue with a line.  Wikipedia has a good description of mind mapping, including a picture of a sample map.  Mind mapping encourages non-linear thought and easy organization, and it will create a path for you to follow as you begin writing.

3.  Begin in the middle.  Pick some part of your final product and start there.  Although a conclusion is a nice place to begin because it will define your approach and may thus make the rest of the writing easier, the important thing is to write some part of your draft.  Even if it’s a paragraph of illogical, emotional argument that you’ll cut from the second draft, just starting will move you forward.

4.  Just start writing.  Many lawyers have an internal critic who comes out to play at inopportune times.  You may start a sentence six times and scrap it each time because it just doesn’t sound right, and the result is verbal paralysis.  So give yourself permission to write something, anything, no matter how bad it may be.  Even if you end up with the legal equivalent of “it was a dark and stormy night,” at least you’ll have a start and something to edit.

5.  Try something unconventional.  When all else fails, turn what you’ve been doing inside out.  Try dictating instead.  Using a different mode of communication can be enough of a change to access the inchoate concept floating around in your mind.  If you don’t want to dictate, try talking out loud, whether to yourself or to a colleague.  Or write in another setting.  Though it may be heresy to some, there is actually no law that requires you to write in your office or even your home office.  Maybe writing at Starbucks or in a park would help.  Maybe you’d be more effective sitting cross-legged on your bed.  Give it a try.  Or write in longhand instead of typing, or vice versa.  Try writing like someone you admire (how would [insert an esteemed lawyer here] phrase this?) or writing like a pirate.  If you get to the point of trying something unconventional, make it as wacky as need be — laughter can also help to break the verbal jam — and then consider whether or how to bill your client for this “out of the box” experiment.

Anger: Managing the amygdala hijack

One of my clients (“Bob”) has had numerous bad experiences with opposing counsel.  Over the last few years, he’s felt more and more worn down by angry phone calls, disingenuous arguments, and general incivility.

(A sidenote: a question we addressed is whether Bob is really surrounded by opposing counsel out to gain some advantage by making him and/or his clients miserable.  Viewed with a dispassionate perspective, the answer was no.  The lesson?  Always step outside your own life and observe.  This perspective will let you recognize whether your day-to-day judgments are well-founded or whether they’re being colored by something else.)

One opposing counsel (“Fred”) was particularly nasty.  Bob had been litigating against Fred for just over a year, and he had recognized that Fred’s strategy was to make him angry.  So, each time he had to interact with Fred, he braced himself and prepared for something outlandish.  But there was one particular tactic that really drove Bob over the edge.  The tactic itself doesn’t matter — let’s say it was being accused of unprofessional conduct — and each time Fred would use this tactic, Bob would become enraged.  To his credit, he was able to manage that anger reasonably well, but enough was revealed that Fred knew he’d found the “right” weapon.  All Fred had to do was use a few choice words, and Bob would become ballistic.  He described a tingling sensation throughout his body, the awareness that his blood pressure had spiked, and great difficulty with remaining engaged on the topic at hand.

What Bob experienced is an “amygdala hijack.”  The amygdala is the “fight or flight” and emotional memory part of the brain. Its job is to protect by comparing incoming data with emotional memories. An amygdala hijack occurs when we respond out of measure with the actual threat because it has triggered a much more significant emotional threat. For instance, the amygdala will react similarly to the threat of being eaten by a tiger (physical threat) and the threat of an ego attack (emotional threat) by bringing on the fight or flight reaction.

When one experiences an amygdala hijack, the amygdala overtakes the neocortex (the thinking part of the brain) and there’s little or no ability to rely on intelligence or reasoning.  The effect is that energy is drawn exclusively into the hijack.  The immediate result of a hijack is a decrease in working memory.  Adrenaline is released and will be present and effective for 18 minutes, and other hormones are released into the bloodstream that will take 3-4 hours to clear.

Randy Chittum, an executive coach on the faculty of Georgetown’s leadership coaching program, has recommended the following steps to deal with an amygdala hijack:

Stop.  Stop whatever you’re doing.  Bob’s strategy was to put the call on hold or to step out of the room for a minute; if that was impossible, he would go silent for a moment and identify for himself what had just happened.  (“Ah, Fred just said again that I’m unprofessional.”)   This step keeps the neocortex engaged and can prevent the amagdala’s takeover.

Oxygenate.  Breathe deeply, with intention and purpose.  This step also keeps the neocortex engaged.

Strengthen appreciation.  It’s difficult to have two emotional experiences at the same time, and appreciation counters the hijack.  While it’s especially effective to appreciate the source of the hijack (i.e., for Bob to appreciate Fred as a person, to appreciate his zealous representation of his client, etc.), any appreciation of anything will be helpful.  Not surprisingly, Bob found it difficult to appreciate Fred, so he would instead think about his family and bask it his appreciation of his wife and children.

Survey the landscape.  After the hijack, spend some time exploring what happened and why.  Recognizing the trigger will allow you to avoid being triggered in the future.  After a recognizing that Fred tended to trot out the accusation of unprofessional conduct when he didn’t get an extension or some other accommodation, Bob was prepared.  He knew that his work had been successful when Fred one day expressed his surprise at Bob’s lack of professionalism, and Bob was able to laugh and respond, “Come on, Fred, we both know that isn’t true and isn’t the point.  Feel free to make your motion, but I can’t consent to another delay in this case.”

Women in law firms

The WSJ Law Blog has an interesting post asking whether women lawyers are reaching a crisis point.  The MIT Workplace Center has issued a report titled “Women Lawyers and Obstacles to Leadership,” which states that of the 1000 Massachusetts lawyers surveyed, 31% of female associates and 18% of male associates had left private practice, as had 35% of female associates with children and 15% of male associates with children.  As might be expected, the report criticized heavy billable hour requirements, inflexible schedules including the lack of real part-time options, and “a lack of appreciation for the need to balance work and family.”

The WSJ Blog then goes on to ask whether readers would encourage their daughters to enter the law and whether readers agree with the report’s summary that “nothing is changing” concerning women’s role in law.  And as is often the case, much of the fun of the post lies in the comments.

Steve Seckler of the Counsel to Counsel blog has a different take on the report in his post Women Are “Staying” in Droves.  Reviewing the same report, and having attended a presentation on it, Steve leads with the statistics that almost 80% of women who leave law firm practice stay in or return to the workforce and more than 50% stay in the legal profession.  The issue, as Steve sees it, is focused on women’s decisions to leave law firms, resulting in the much-quoted statistic that only 17% of large law firm partners are women.   (Robert Ambrogi treats the issue similarly in his post The Uneven Partnership Track.)  Fascinating to me is the email attached at the end of Steve’s post from Sheila Statlender, a clinical psychologist who is a member of the Boston Bar Association’s Standing Committee of Work/Life Balance, in which she fantasizes about women and their “male supporters” walking out of their firms for a couple of hours or a day to protest current conditions for women and to support/brainstorm/educate around strategies to address those conditions.  Good reading, though I’m not sure I’ll be holding my breath for enactment.

This issue presents a variety of challenges: opportunities for women vs. men in career and family; biological imperatives and societal response to them; sociological stereotypes; law firm economics; family economics… The list could go on and on.  Looking at the questions raised on the “big picture” level, it seems to me that what we’re seeing is the challenge that arises whenever someone takes on a one-dimensional role that is (or is expected to be) all-encompassing.  It’s the perception that a lawyer who’s a Big Firm Partner (or Associate) can’t also be a Mother, because those two roles conflict.

Perhaps I’m feeling unduly idealistic today, but I wonder whether demoting these roles to being aspects of an integrated, whole person might be a step in the right direction — with a hefty dose of reconciling the whole person to the realities of law firm and personal economics.  Not to say that finding that integration is an easy process or without challenges and trade-offs, but most questions tend to move toward solution when posed as A and B rather than A or B.  I also will take a stand for the proposition that working fathers are as entitled to the same personal/professional integration as working mothers, and the “societal stare decisis” that holds otherwise (to quote a brilliant turn of phrase by a “2L Woman” commenter on the WSJ Law Blog) deserves to be overturned.

But, when the measuring stick for so many is profits per partner, doesn’t the dollar determine the destiny?

Follow-up from the NALP conference

Last Wednesday, I attended the NALP Annual Education Conference.  I wish I’d planned to be there for the whole conference, because I met some fantastic people (including Steve Seckler of the Counsel to Counsel blog) and read about a number of presentations that I would have loved to attend.  But, I’d budgeted only one day, and much of that was taken up with final preparations for the presentation I made with three delightful colleagues.

I was able to attend the keynote speech by Angie Morgan and Courtney Lynch, two women who, following their service as U.S. Marine officers, have dedicated themselves to advancing women as leaders.  They spoke on several of the leadership principles in their book Leading from the Front: No Excuse Leadership Tactics for Women; the principle that caught my attention was to seek to take responsibility before seeking to place blame.  (Their wording is no doubt catchier, but that’s the gist.)  I’ve seen too many instances in which teams of lawyers turn on one another when there’s a problem, and application of this principle might help teams resolve problems.  I plan to read the book, and I’ll post a follow-up review when I do.  At a minimum, attending the keynote was a well-spent hour.

And then I caught up with my co-presenters: Jory Fisher, Associate Dean for Career & Professional Development at Liberty Law School, Ann Skalaski, a consultant for law schools and law firms as well as a recruiter and career coach, and Dayle Savage, Professor and Director of the Peabody Career Center and Vanderbilt University and a a coach and consultant with spiraLearning.  It was a pleasure to work with these bright, personable women!

Our topic was Facilitating a Successful Transition from Law Student to Lawyer.  I would guess that close to 100 people attended the program, and we engaged in a rich discussion about what law schools and law firms are doing right and what each could do better to help students make the leap.  The conclusion that each of us reached is that it’s critical to bring law schools and law firms together so discuss expectations for new lawyers, as well as to address what each side can and should do to help new lawyers accrue the necessary skills for success.  In the course of the presentation, we shared several resources, one of which I’d like to highlight here:

Best Practices in Attorney Professional Development: Heading Off and Handling Wrong Turns, prepared by the ABA Career Resource Center with the cooperation of the Professional Development Consortium.  Numerous law firm recruiters and professional development coordinators contributed to this book that presents best practices for lawyers, law firms, and professional development specialists.  The contributors provides practical advice on a variety of situations that associates may encounter, such as how to handle mistakes, how to request and implement feedback received from supervising lawyers, and how to maintain an appropriate workload.  Also included are suggestions for law firms (such as using a competency model to build a high performance culture and creating effective lateral transition programs) and advice, job descriptions, and advertisements for professional development specialists.  The book would be useful for both attorneys and administrators, and it’s worth every penny.  As I described it during the program, it’s like a mentor-in-a-book for associates.

Our time was short — the 90 minutes allotted flew by — but the attendees both offered and received some terrific ideas for enhancing professional development programs.  I understand that NALP makes notes and handouts from the conference freely available on its web site, so if you’re interested in more information, you may want to visit the NALP website in 2-3 weeks.

Wrap-up on The Ms. JD — Legally Female Conference, and “Work-Life Blending”

As I mentioned in a previous post, Ms. JD held a kick-off conference at Yale Law School last Saturday.  I wasn’t able to attend (sadly for me, I was literally elbow-deep in mulch, adding sweat equity to a rural Maryland property to be resold in about 3 years, for what I trust will be great profit) but I’ve scanned the web for write-ups from those who were fortunate enough to attend.

Susan Carter Liebel of Build A Solo Practice, LLC has posted a full summary of the conference (and promised more to come), while Lisa Solomon, the Legal Research & Writing Pro, offers an interesting review of a panel discussion of how women in the law can make use of technology.  Finally, the New Haven Independent covered the keynote speech by the Hon. Janet Bond Arterton of the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut.  (The article begins by describing Judge Arterton’s shock at being addressed by male lawyers as “sir.”  The import of the anecdote rests in the fact that Judge Arterton was appointed to the bench in 1995, long after a female judge should have been a novelty — indeed, she was the 100th woman appointed to be a U.S. district judge.)

And don’t overlook the reading material offered by the panels, which is available on Ms. JD.

It looks like a terrific conference, and I wish I could have attended.  Something tells me there will be more to come, though.

On a related note… Work/life balance is often tagged as a woman’s issue or, more specifically, as an issue that pertains to new mothers in the years before they decide whether to “get back to work” or to “stay home with the kids.”  (PLEASE note the quotation marks around those limited and limiting phrases!)

But I take a stand for the proposition that it’s an issue that touches all of us, and so I was delighted to see Chuck Newton, of the Chuck Newton Rides the Third Wave blog, posting on “work-life blending.”  I like the idea that well-used technology may allow lawyers to blend work and personal time, though reality for many seems to be that technology allows work to bleed into personal time without boundaries.  How flexible are you willing to allow your work/life boundaries to be?

 

Understanding your client’s business

I’ve long believed that newer associates (especially, but not exclusively) don’t understand their clients’ business and how business issues effect legal services.  Without understanding what the business context is for the legal issue you’re working on, it’s going to be difficult to know how important the issue is — i.e., is this a “bet the company” issue, or is it a fairly minor issue that neither demands nor permits extensive research and analysis?  Either end of that continuum is fairly easy to recognize, but knowing how to approach “middle” issues requires a bit more finesse.  A lawyer who provides excellent client service will know the scope of her client’s business, will understand the business context for the legal issues, and will include the business perspective in her advice to the client.

It’s equally critical for lawyers to understand the business and economics of the law firm in which they operate — the business concerns of the lawyer’s internal client.  How many lawyers have had to write down time of a junior associate because the work wasn’t efficient or wasn’t on point, thus inappropriate for the firm to bill to a client, therefore lost productivity for the firm?  Worse yet, how many lawyers have billed such time, not understanding that just because billable work is performed doesn’t mean that it’s payable?  Ouch.  And lawyers become managers-in-fact as they advance, it’s equally important that lawyers understand something about management and interpersonal business relationships — topics that may pay dividends in client development efforts as well.

So, one key aspect of professional development is getting some grounding in the business of your clients and your firm.  Read the business pages and the Wall Street Journal and get some grounding in basic business principles.