Consistency in rainmaking efforts; making the most of the next 2 months

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Tom Collins posted last month on The 10 to 15 Minute Rainmaking Plan (no longer available).  The principle is that marketing activity fits nicely into any lawyer’s schedule when arranged in 10- to 15-minute phone calls,  and that the benefits of these calls accrue when done daily.  He suggests several questions that would lead very nicely into a focused conversation that will at least deepen a relationship and could perhaps lead to new business.  Most helpfully, Tom also suggests ways that your assistant can help you identify the people you might call each day.

As I’ve noted before, marketing guru Jay Conrad Levinson has observed, “a mediocre marketing program with commitment will always prove more profitable than a brilliant marketing program without commitment.”  Tom’s post suggests a much better than mediocre way to arrange a program you can work consistently.  Try it for a few months and see what happens.  I suspect you’ll be pleased with the results.

And, as today is November 1, it’s time to pause and ask two questions: What did I intend to accomplish in 2006?  Have I done it?  The next two months are a good time to press so you can close out the year on a high note.  Especially with the holidays coming up, it’s easy to plan a fresh start for January and to spend the rest of this year focused only on practice deadlines — the “urgent” rather than the “important”.  But wouldn’t you rather start 2007 continuing a high point rather than having to reconstruct your mothballed professional development or client development plans?  Give it some thought.

The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law

/3 Comments/in , , /by

The Wall Street Journal law blog is featuring Mark Herrmann’s The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law this week.   The series started today with a review and an excerpt from the book on defending depositions, and the blog promises that excerpts will continue through the week.  If you’d like to go whole hog and buy the book now, you can find it on Amazon for a better price than the ABA website offers.  (As a sidenote, Amazon pairs it with Bryan Garner’s The Winning Brief: 100 Tips for Persuasive Briefing in Trial and Appellate Courts, another terrific resource.)   I’d resisted posting about this book primarily because it seems that everyone else has already done so, but the tidbits that the WSJ blog promises this week will likely help readers decide to purchase the book.

When I began working at Jones Day, Herrmann’s marvelous article This Is What I’m Thinking: A Dialogue Between Partner and Associate . . . From The Partner (published Fall 1998 in Litigation magazine and, sadly, unavailable online) was provided to all associates.  I can’t even guess how many times I referred to that article and several others Herrmann wrote about brief writing; The Curmudgeon’s Guide expands on the kind of tips provided in those articles and, indeed, attempts to introduce the reader with the principles that will permit her to have a successful and rewarding career.

I highly recommend the book because it’s an easy and enjoyable read, and it’s packed with useful advice.  And, in the end, The Curmedgeon’s Guide delivers an unwavering focus on the importance of excellent client service, an appropriate reminder for every lawyer.  Check out the excerpts on the WSJ law blog, and then pick up your own copy.  This is one of the rare law practice how-to books that belongs on every lawyer’s shelf.

Public perception of lawyers

/1 Comment/in , , , /by

Someone recently found this blog with a search on “All Lawyers Are Assholes.”  Yes, complete with the initial caps.  After I quit laughing (and got over being briefly miffed that this search implies that I, too, am an asshole simply because I’m a lawyer), I started wondering whether the searcher was looking for confirmation of his/her assertion.  I’d love to know whether s/he found that confirmation.

Years ago, after I’d been in practice for a few years, I spent a weekend with a college roommate and met a bunch of her friends.  As I introduced myself and admitted that I’m a lawyer, people’s attitudes shifted subtly.  Sometimes, I’d get hit with a request for free legal advice: “Y’see, I have this problem with my [employer, service provider, spouse, whatever] and I’m wondering….”  Others, especially medical professionals who weren’t doctors, would almost shudder and back off.  (Seriously, I’m not making this up, and I’ve never even worked on a med mal case!)  And a few would ask about my practice, continue the conversation, and eventually circle back to law by saying, “You know, you just don’t seem like a lawyer.”  I never knew quite what to do with that, or even whether it was intended as a compliment or an insult.

It’s always seemed to me that it’s a privilege to be a lawyer.  We have the ability to effect change in society more directly than many other professionals, we have the skill and training to recognize when something just isn’t right and to work to make it right, and we have the opportunity to help people who need it.  Strangely, that isn’t how the public usually perceives lawyers, and sometimes I wonder whether it’s how the profession perceives itself.

Attorneys sometimes behave as if practice is a burden, a horrible way to make a living because of the competing demands of practice and life and satisfying clients.  And, no doubt, sometimes it is a burden, but it’s a voluntary burden and it’s important for us to recognize that if the burden is too heavy, if it outweighs the privilege, plenty of other jobs are available that would reap the benefits of a law degree without actually requiring practice.

Too often, we view our work as hours to be put in, a way to make more and more money.  Reaping financial reward isn’t wrong.  But I submit that something is off-kilter when a profession becomes all about money, and I’d argue that something has gone very wrong when the public perception is that a lawyer can be bought, that the outcome of a legal dispute depends most on which party has the higher-paid lawyer.  This is a bigger problem than I’m prepared to address today, not only because of the public perception but also because so many new lawyers face the squeeze of student debt and salary lower than they’d been led to expect.

Finally, there’s a huge negativity surrounding legal practice.  We lawyers both propogate and, in my view, suffer from this negativity.

What lawyers believe about practicing law has a huge impact on how we behave, and how we behave has significant influence on how we are perceived.  Are you contributing to a positive or negative public perception of lawyers?

Working hard vs. working smart

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Have you heard this distinction before?  All sorts of management experts talk about how people can work more efficiently, more effectively, maximizing the results of time.  Some of them even have good ideas.

I’ve been thinking about what it means to say that practicing law is hard work.  I don’t have any question that it is challenging and demanding, for reasons that I’ve mentioned numerous times.  What I find myself wondering is whether it’s possible to “work smart” in practice; I think the answer is a qualified yes.

Working smart means managing your physical environment.  If you take the time to keep your desk clear, so it’s always easy to locate the files and the resources you need.  Nothing wastes time like clutter.  The simple act of taking an extra 5-10 minutes to clear and tidy your work area at the end of the day can yield significant time savings.  I had to learn this the hard way, but having learned it, it’s become a standard for myself in the office.

Working smart means managing energy.  If I’m exhausted and I try to power through rather than resting, chances are good that it’ll take me more time than usual to accomplish anything.  If I’m on a deadline, the adrenaline will carry and cancel the “dead woman drag” — but if it’s an average Wednesday, I didn’t sleep well, I have a headache, and I notice that I’m reading things three times and still not registering, taking a pause will be well worth my time.  When I have plenty of energy and get in the flow of work, I often find that my productivity shoots up and I’m able to accomplish remarkable tasks, so I do my best to take advantage of my energy rhythms.

Working smart means managing commitments.  It’s easy to say yes to every demand, but it isn’t smart.  Making intentional and purposeful decisions about which commitments to accept and which to decline allows me to avoid the frazzled, frantic pace that undermines good work.

Working smart means managing people.  Good delegation enhances effective work.  Whether it’s requesting research from a more junior lawyer or asking an assistant to draft routine communications for my review and editing, my time is freed up so I can concentrate on doing the things that others can’t do.

Does any of this mean that it’s possible to take shortcuts and reap the rewards of practice without putting in plenty of time and effort?  Absolutely not.  But attention to smart management will make the time and effort you put into your practice pay maximum rewards.

Look for what’s right.

/2 Comments/in , , /by

It’s often easy, and rather in vogue, to think that practicing law is a drain, a burden, incompatible with having a personal life.  Sometimes that’s true.  If it’s more often than not true for any individual lawyer, there’s a problem that needs a solution — a new way of approaching practice or managing your energy, a new job, perhaps, or a new area of practice, or possibly a career other than practicing law.  But it’s a continuum, with “perfect” untouched on one end and “unbearably horrible” untouched on the other end.

Where on the continuum are you?  Very often we diagnose based on what’s wrong.  But today, I’d like to suggest a different set of questions.  What’s right in your practice?  What do you enjoy?  When are you at your best in practice?  What gives you the rush, the thrill, the joy of being a lawyer?  And how do you get more of the good stuff?

It’s just as important to evaluate what’s going well as it is to identify and correct what isn’t.  In fact, it may be more important, simply because we tend to find what we expect to find.  Practice is challenging, but if you expect it to be unpleasant, chances are strong that it will be.  With that in mind, it makes sense to spend some time identifying the good parts of practice so you have a better opportunity to expect and recognize the recurring good things.  For examples of what some lawyers see as being right in practice, visit Stephanie West Allen’s Legal Highlights series here, here, and here.

Emotional intelligence for lawyers

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

Emotional intelligence (EI) refers to the degree to which one is:

*  aware of one’s own feelings,
*  able to discriminate among those feelings and to manage them to faciliate appropriate responses,
*  able to motivate oneself despite feelings of self-doubt, inertia, etc.,
*  able to recognize others’ emotions based on various cues,
*  empathetic to others’ feelings, and
*  skilled in handling interpersonal relationships and conflicts.

Research by Daniel Goleman, who brought EI to public attention with his book Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ, shows that 85-95% of the difference between a “good leader” and an “excellent leader” is due to emotional intelligence.  Goleman’s new book, Social Intelligence, examines neuroscience to further support the idea that humans have a biological tendency to be empathetic, cooperative, and altruistic.  It’s no secret that we’d all prefer to work with and for nice people rather than jerks, and EI is a measurable way to describe how a a “nice person” behaves and to help pinpoint the areas for individual improvement.

Googling on “emotional intelligence” will turn up over 3 million hits; Googling on “social intelligence” turns up about 38,500 (but Goleman new book was released only in late September, so that will surely change).  Stephen Seckler has provided a link to a very well-written Altman Weil article on EI for lawyers, complete with a quiz to reveal your EQ.  Check it out.

Timesheet habits: don’t procrastinate.

/3 Comments/in , , , /by

Timesheets routinely come up as a bemoaned part of practice, something that no one likes to do.  Many lawyers develop the habit of doing timesheets in bulk, usually at the end of the week but sometimes at the end of the month.  That’s a terrible habit for a wide variety of reasons.

Unless your notes are truly spectacular (i.e., timesheet quality at least in substance), you will lose time because it simply isn’t possible to remember every single call made or received, every in-firm conversation, etc.  I’ve seen some studies showing that lawyers who do end-of-month timesheets can lose up to 30% of their time.  That’s bad for the firm and for the attorney.

Approaching billing with this habit of procrastination makes what could be a fairly simple and straightforward task into a Huge Effort.  Timesheets become the constant millstone.  Sure, you get to ignore them for a month at a time, but then you’ll have to devote at least a full morning and probably longer to reconstructing your time.  The longer one waits to prepare timesheets after actually doing the work, the harder it will be to recreate the time and the longer it’ll take to prepare the timesheet.  Bad for the firm, bad for the attorney.

Moreover, it appears that clients may move from accepting monthly bills to wanting the ability to monitor lawyers’ work in real time using e-bills.  Technology may enable clients to demand not only a budget but also real time updates on how the budget is being used, whether it’s being exceeded, etc.  While that system isn’t in effect in the US today, it’s apparently coming in the UK, and lawyers would be well-advised to adapt their habits to minimize the pain if, or perhaps when, e-billing crosses the pond.  See also Tom Collins’ posts discussing the reasons for the move to e-billing and describing the software support that will assist in meeting clients’ demands.

If creating timesheets contemporaneously with completing the work is helpful for capturing time, saving time, and preparing for what sounds a lot like the next step toward client awareness and management of the performance of legal services, where’s the downside to developing strong habits?  Explore your billing software to see whether it has a timer function — most do.  If not, at least use your calendar to mark down your time as you work, and transfer it to a timesheet at the end of the day.  This one habit will increase both your productivity and your apparent productivity significantly.

Peak or valley? Performing a realistic and meaningful self-evaluation

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

Just about every firm has some formal mechanism for evaluating associates.  The format varies, but the general idea is always the same: to collect feedback on how well each associate is performing and to pass that on to the associate, preferably with some comments about how the associate might improve.  Fair enough, except that the method of communicating the results of that exercise to the associate often undercuts the effectiveness and benefit that an evaluation is supposed to convey.  Toward the end of the year (traditional evaluation time), I’ll discuss this topic in more depth.

For now, let’s consider self-evaluation.  A number of large firms are using the self-evaluation model to help associates determine their career path.  Again, the format varies, but generally the associate is asked to fill out a form that asks for the associate’s self-evaluation in certain areas and sets plans for the future.  If taken seriously, these programs can be very useful in helping to guide associates’ professional development.

The challenge arises, however, when the associate may begin to feel his or her path diverging from the firm.  Because the truth is that the self-evaluation and professional planning programs may benefit the firm just as much as they do the associate.  I encourage lawyers who are completing these self-evaluations to go through the process twice: once, without censoring anything, and a second time with an eye to how the firm might perceive her comments.  For instance, an associate might be unhappy about work/life balance, but it’s wise to pay careful attention to how that issue is raised.  Commenting that she’d like to focus on becoming even more effective in her use of time is palatable; commenting that she’d like to reduce her in-office hours is not.  But it’s possible to develop a lot of useful information in responding to the self-evaluation and planning forms that the firm provides.

If your firm doesn’t engage in this process, or if you sense that your professional desires may be leading you away from the firm fold, you may want to consider these questions.

1.  How satisfied are you with your practice setting?  Are you aware of any reason why a different practice setting (larger or smaller firm, sole practice, in-house, government, or public service) might be preferable for you?

2.  How well are you perceived in your firm?  Do you need to make an effort to raise your visibility?

3.  Are you taking advantage of what your firm offers in terms of training, professional networking opportunities, social/cultural opportunities, etc?  Are you cross-selling to your clients, and are other lawyers cross-selling your services to their clients?

4.  How well are you working with support staff?  Are any changes necessary?  Are you communicating clearly with the staff?  Are these any tasks you can effectively delegate?  Any procedures you could institute to make things run more smoothly?

5.  How are you doing in terms of skills development?  Is there any kind of training you need?  If so, what’s your plan for getting that training?

6.  Are you satisfied with the quality and quantity of assignments you’re receiving?  Is your level of responsibility increasing appropriately?  If the answer to either question is anything other than an unqualified yes, what have you done to rectify the situation?  If you’re not receiving an adequate quantity of work, is that because business is down generally, or is there a chance that it’s a reflection on your work or on how you’re perceived within the firm?  What do you need to do differently?

7.  Are you satisfied with your level of client contact?  What can you do to provide better service to your clients?  Do you have a client development plan, and are you working it on a regular basis?

8.  How is your relationship with the lawyers who supervise your work?  What can you do to make it stronger?  How do they perceive you?  What changes would you like to make?

9.  What are your career goals for the next three years, both in terms of substantive/skills development and in terms of your position with the firm?  What’s your strategy for reaching these goals?

10.  Are you satisfied with your work/life balance?  Are any changes desirable or necessary?

These are, of course, just a sample of the range of questions you might ask.  The most critical part of your self-evaluation is to take a realistic look at where you stand professionally now, to reflect thoughtfully on where you want to be professionally in at least the next one to three years, and to think strategically about what adjustments you need to make so you can reach those goals.  You may find it particularly valuable to perform this kind of self-evaluation with the assistance of a mentor or a coach, either of whom can help with each of these three steps.

Do you delegate well?

/0 Comments/in , , /by

An important skill to learn for practicing law is how to delegate. All lawyers delegate; few lawyers delegate well.

Whether you’re just starting out in practice or whether you’ve been in practice for many years, part of your responsibilities will include delegation. If you’ve ever received an incomprehensible assignment, consider these tips so you don’t perpetuate the cycle.

To delegate well, think in terms of the “5 Ws” that you likely learned years ago: Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How. Of course, in this context, some of the Ws are less important than usual — but they’re a helpful organizing model nonetheless.

Who  First, select the person to whom you’re going to delegate. This is often an easy step, but do consider whether the person you have in mind has the ability to do what you need done. For instance, you might delegate preparaing documents for production to a brand new associate or a 3rd year associate, but if you’re concerned about intricate privilege issues, you’d be wiser to select the more senior associate.  (But you’ll review the “close call” documents either way — right?)

What Define exactly what you want done. Define the project specifically. Until you’re skilled at delegation, you might even consider writing down the request to make sure it’s clear. And then consider what you want to receive. If it’s a research project, do you want the work product in the form of a memo, an outline, or an oral report? Do you want the treatise-length exposition of all of the ins and outs of the issue, or do you want a quick-and-dirty answer? Do you want to see the cases cited? In addition, consider how much background you need to provide in the assignment. If you’re requesting research on a fact-specific issue, you’ll need to provide the relevant facts or a source from which they can be determined.

Doing this when you make the assignment will save you much time in the long run.  There’s little more frustrating than getting the answer to the wrong question.

When Two components here: When should you make the assignment, and when do you need the project you’re delegating to be completed? Be sure to give yourself plenty of time to review the work — in other words, don’t request critical research for a brief to be delivered to you on the morning the brief is due to be filed. Although many lawyers seem to raise procrastination to an art form, your practice and your life will run more smoothly if you arrange a schedule that leaves adequate time in case there’s a misstep.

Where If you’re assigning an off-site project, provide whatever information is necessary. Except in the case of document review, this isn’t usually a factor.

Why It’s tempting to say that the only answer to “why” the delegated project should be done is because you’re the lawyer and you said so. Fight this urge! Consider whether explaining why you need something done will increase the likelihood that you’ll get what you really need. For instance, if you need legal research to prepare you for an argument, the person to whom you delegate the work will be able to keep that in mind as he’s performing the task and will therefore be more likely to note any procedural issues in the cases that might be relevant.

How If you have preferences on how a project should be completed, say so. For instance, if you are requesting your secretary to set up a filing system for you and you have particular preferences about how your files are arranged, communicate that.

It may take a little extra effort, at least initially, to delegate well. The effort is wisely invested, though, because good delegation will increase the chances of getting the project done when you need it and in the way you need it. You’ll also be a better colleague, which always pays dividends.

When personal life impacts professional life

/0 Comments/in , , /by

One of the ways that I describe the work I do is “professional and personal coaching for lawyers.”  Although I occasionally do what amounts to life coaching for someone who happens to be a lawyer, my passion lies in helping lawyers develop their professional lives, which often relates in some way to their personal lives.

Sometimes, the relationship between the professional and personal sides of life becomes blurred.  That may be a work/life balance issue that calls for reflection on the degree, if any, to which the lawyer wants to separate the two.

But sometimes, a lawyer will experience a personal problem that he can’t keep entirely separate from his professional life.  Serious illness is one example, though the challenge there tends to come when the actual crisis is over, when recovery begins.  My take on that situation is rather clear: do whatever is necessary to ensure your reclaimed health, no matter what professional consequences may follow, but conduct your affairs so that your clients don’t suffer.

Then there are the personal circumstances that don’t have the potential for personal life-or-death consequences.  Examples are a family member’s prolonged illness or death, facing the prospect or reality of divorce.  Although most of us are practiced at putting on the “game face” and getting on with work, events of this magnitude may make it difficult or impossible to manage that.  Each person is, of course, different, and no solution will fit everyone.  Here, however, are some ideas of coping mechanisms.

Support.  Get the support you need, whether that’s counseling, a support group, a coach, or some blend of the three.  Asking for help may not come naturally, but it can help you avoid mental or emotional tunnel vision and help you identify your best options.

Consider whether to share your news.  Depending on the situation, you may need to let a colleague or supervisor at your firm know what’s going on.  There’s no need to share details, but especially if you suspect that there will be an actual conflict between your professional responsibilities and your personal ones, it’s often best to let someone else know.

Practice centering exercises.  Whether it’s meditation, yoga, or just deep breathing, physical activities can help you center yourself so you are better prepared to deal with work while you’re working and less likely to be pulled away mentally or emotionally by whatever is causing you distress.  This can be as simple as sitting in silence for 3-4 minutes and paying attention to your breath, gently releasing any thoughts that may come up.  The beauty of a practice this simple, of course, is that you can revisit it at any moment, without even letting others know you’re doing it.

Excellent self-care.  Get enough sleep.  Eat real, healthy food.  Don’t drink too much alcohol.  Keep your body well-hydrated.  When you’re under severe stress, it’s easy to let his go, but the extra effort will serve you well.

Be realistic.  You may need to cut back on your hours, take a “vacation,” or even take a leave of absence.  Or you may not.  But don’t try to be a hero.  A realistic appraisal of your energy will keep you from taking on too much, causing yourself to crash and burn.

Reflect.  Journal writing can be a terrific tool for working through difficult issues.

Manage your energy.  Take advantage of the days when you have sufficient energy to work hard.  Although you can take steps to keep your energy as high as possible (the other steps suggested here, for instance), it’s a reasonably safe bet that your energy will lag at some point, and you’ll be able to work with that rhythm if you maximize your output when you can.

Remember that this, too, will pass.  It’s a trite saying that may not offer much comfort in the moments of deepest pain, but the difficult times will not last forever.