legal sanity

Because I work as a lawyer and mediator and write and speak on topics related to those pursuits, people often ask for my take on the role of advocates in mediation. I typically respond that success in the mediation process often turns on a much-ignored factor: whether lawyer and client have come to a common understanding of the matter and have worked together to set realistic goals that meet the client's real needs and interests. In my experience, the most debilitating fissure to navigate in mediation can be the one between a participant and his or her counsel. While it does not address this particular issue, this article offers interesting commentary on the role of lawyers in mediation. In Rashomon fashion, it considers the process through the eyes of two eyewitnesses: The first, a "group of attorneys selected for their hard-hitting style and experience; the second, experienced mediators, all with different backgrounds and styles." Both groups report on "what works for them" and "what hinders success" in mediation. The group responses are quite distinct. The advocates essentially see the process as a means of settling or, at least, learning more about a case. Some even concede that "their intent in mediation is to facilitate a win by using it to optimize their clients' position in the litigation." The mediation panelists, by contrast, state that "the purpose of mediation is to bring both sides together, not only to settle for a dollar value and dispose of the litigation, but also to address the needs of the parties, explore creative solutions to resolve the underlying dispute, and achieve a common objective." While the advocate team divides on the issue of "allowing their client to speak" during the mediation, the mediators all agree that mediation is "a place for clients to talk, vent, explain, express their values and feelings, and a place to repair relationships, if appropriate." The two groups do unite on some basic points, including "the crucial importance of building trust between the mediator and the parties." FYI, I will be speaking on the subject of aligning lawyer and client interests in mediation at the Association of Conflict Resolution's Annual Conference, September 28-October 1, 2005, in Minneapolis, MN. You can check out the conference offerings and register here.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments

I consider this article (pdf) by Patrick J. Schiltz a seminal part of the growing pool of literature on avoiding malaise and cultivating satisfaction in the legal profession. I read it after I started practicing and found its message very relevant and profound. I think all 1Ls should read it to start an ongoing dialogue about life in the law. It would also compel important discussions when incorporated into CLE programs on professional ethics and work-life balance.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments

From the Worthwhile blog and contributor Curt Rosengren comes some interesting and disheartening data on workplace satisfaction in America. According to the post, of the 7,718 American workers polled in a recent survey, "only 12% are extremely satisfied, 20% feel very passionate, and less than 15% feel strongly energized by their work." Perhaps we would all benefit from a tutorial based on this recent post from Creating Passionate Users. Considering "what it looks like when people are passionate," contributor Kathy Sierra comes up with seven distinct atributes. People with a passion: "Evangelize, Connect, Learn, Improve, Show Off, Spend Time and Spend Money." While Sierra's referring to passionate consumers of goods or services, some of these passion markers also apply to fostering a passionate workforce. A company, such as a law firm, will benefit significantly if it has a corporate culture, vision, products and services that inspire its employees to: become company evangelists; connect with each other and others around corporate initiatives; learn and re-learn how to improve the company's offerings or business model; and spend time during and outside regular work hours striving to move the business forward.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments

This article and this one make good companion pieces about the fuzzy boundary between our personal and professional lives. The first article discusses the scourge of "overwork" in America. As more and more businesses look to boost their bottom line with fewer employees, we've seen the advent of a 40+ hour work week that's invaded our weekend and vacation time. We're also under the heavy influence of a culture in which people "define themselves by their work" as opposed to their "hobbies and other things." Because our sense of self is so bound up with our "success in business," we tend to wear our overwhelm as a badge of honor - as a testament to a job taken seriously and well done. While it attempts to put a humorous spin on this "inability" to distinguish "self from work," the second article speaks volumes about the current state of our profession when it proclaims: "While it may be mentally healthy to separate practicing law and home life, in many instances it is nearly impossible."

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments

Like many others, I regularly read Seth Godin's blog. This recent post really struck a chord. In it, Godin states that fear of failure is a much overrated excuse for our failure to produce goods, services and other results that are remarkable. What really holds us back from achieving our goal of remarkability is our fear of criticism. This fear is especially insidious because, as Godin says, "the criticism doesn't actually have to occur for the fear to set in. Watch a few people get criticized for being innovative and it's pretty easy to persuade yourself that the very same thing will happen to you if you're not careful." Godin rightly proclaims people who deliver unconstructive criticism "cowards" for using their "power to injure without giving you any information to help you to do better next time." He goes on to offer these words to ponder on the road to remarkability:

"If I get criticized for this, will I suffer any measurable impacts? Will I lose my job, get hit upside the head with a softball bat or lose important friendships?" If the only side effect of the criticism is that you will feel bad about the criticism, then you have to compare that bad feeling with the benefits you'll get from actually doing something worth doing. Being remarkable is exciting, fun, profitable and great for your career. Feeling bad wears off."

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments

Another book in my "to read" pile is Keith Ferrazzi's never eat alone, a guide to connecting with people in our social and business networks. You can read excerpts from the book here. In this article, Ferrazzi addresses a key component of networking - understanding the special values we bring to any relationship. Ferrazzi calls these values "currencies." Our currency is our "capacity to help somebody else fulfill their mission or vision of themselves in some way." Most of us have multiple currencies. Some are naturally stronger than others. Indeed, as Ferrazzi emphasizes, typically "our most valuable currencies are things we do that seem as natural as breathing -- natural to us, but to others, these skills are a real rarity!" To discover our currencies, Ferrazzi suggests that we consider these questions:

• "What things do you say about yourself and your interests that excite or intrigue people you meet?"
• "When did you help make someone else a success at something?"
• "Of the times you were able to give, which worked the best and which felt the best?"
• "How can you purposely incorporate those currencies into your sales and networking plans?"

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments

Since I'm in the midst of some major business changes (all good), I was compelled to read Spencer Johnson's Who Moved My Cheese? , a short book written in allegory style that's helped many people consider, and reconsider, how they handle a constant in today's world - change. After reading it, I happened upon a recent Fast Company article entitled Change or Die. It opens with this compelling question: "What if a well-informed, trusted authority figure said you had to make difficult and enduring changes in the way you think and act? If you didn't, your time would end soon -- a lot sooner than it had to. Could you change when change really mattered? When it mattered most?" I figured it a rhetorical question. Of course people would change when faced with this do-or-die scenario. Apparently, I was way off. According to the piece, the odds are 9 to 1 against change. When faced with a health, business or other type of upheaval, it seems people want to change, but can't. Apparently, the problem is not that we're incapable of change. We just rarely get the right kind of motivation. We aren't wired to change via appeals to our intellect alone. We need to be convinced of the need for change on an emotional level. But, as the article points out, "that kind of emotional persuasion isn't taught in business schools, and it doesn't come naturally to the technocrats who run things -- the engineers, scientists, lawyers, doctors, accountants, and managers who pride themselves on disciplined, analytical thinking." So, what's the recourse for those of us who want to foster change in our businesses and beyond? We first need to reframe our approach and promote change using a "positive, inspiring, and emotionally resonant" narrative that appeals to people with diverse mind-sets and values. In addition to this type of reframing, the piece instructs, people tend to respond better to bigger, or more radical, change efforts. They're also more likely to accept and sustain change if there's a support system in place to help them along.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments

As part of my business offerings, I coach lawyers on achieving success and satisfaction and thwarting career burnout by building key skills in communication and negotiation, the attorney-client relationship and career success and fulfillment. I really enjoy helping other practitioners optimize their life in the law. I've also benefited tremendously from being coached at various points in my career. Along the way, I've learned that many lawyers are unfamiliar with the coaching process. This recent article provides a nice overview of executive coaching, which aims to help lawyers become more adept at client development. According to the piece, the 3-6 month regimen typically starts with "a needs analysis" and "setting individualized objectives" and fosters, among other things, "renewed energies to grow your business in today's demanding legal environment." Another article discusses the work of life coaches, trained professionals who "counsel people who need a nudge, guidance, or support (or all three) in matters ranging from health and wellness issues to financial and business affairs." While some quibble that this type of coaching is synonymous with psychotherapy, the piece aptly challenges that argument, stating: "Coaches offer action-oriented advice, focusing on forward-looking solutions instead of delving into a person's psychological past. Few have therapy or counseling backgrounds." If these articles peak your curiosity, there are a number of very good books about coaching - like this one - that will broaden your understanding.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments

I previously wrote about Tim Sanders and his terrific book Love is the Killer App . His new book, The Likeability Factor, is out and I can't wait to read it. According to his official site, in this book, Sanders extrapolates on the basic theory that "people who are well liked are more apt to get what they want out of life than those who are disliked" by outlining the "four personality traits he says contribute to a person's likeability—namely, friendliness, relevance (do you connect on interests or needs?), empathy and 'realness' (genuineness or authenticity)." In my experience, most lawyers are not well-versed in the value of being real, empathic and likeable. In fact, most rainmaking seminars teach us how to extol our own (or our firm's) virtues in arm's length interactions that are more robotic and rote than warm and personal. As this recent Inc.com article suggests, people who eschew intimacy in favor of the "let's talk about me" school of rainmaking are missing the boat: "They're building transactional, peripheral, unimportant contacts. They're making all kinds of introductions without ever really connecting. They're not building relationships. They're passing out business cards." If you're curious about your likeability factor, Sanders provides this short self-assessment exercise(pdf).

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments

A contributor at tompeters! poses this interesting question: "When we blog how can we ensure that we are adding to the amount of action in the world rather than the amount of chattering?" Here's my response. Although I write articles for print and online publications, this blog gives me an unmatched platform for sharing my thoughts on optimizing skills, success and satisfaction in the law. Through blogging, I've connected with others looking to move the legal profession in a positive direction by creating a dialogue among legal service providers and consumers. The LexThink event I discussed here is a prime example of the constructive action blogging can beget in the world. And here's another action point: Blogging (both publishing my own blog and reading others) has helped me put my ideas into practice through my seminars and consulting business and other speaking engagements. Because these ideas have been so well received, I've decided to devote more time and resources to my work as a speaker-educator. As I move along the new professional path I've mapped out, I know that this blog will provide a great forum for sharing the challenges I'll face and the triumphs that will spur me onward.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments

I always enjoy reading the creating passionate users blog. It offers very fresh and interesting ideas about fostering optimal consumer experiences - ideas that apply to businesses across the board, including the business of legal service delivery. One of its recent posts highlights this basic tenet of our emerging experience economy: Potential consumers of our services really don't care how terrific we are or how many big awards we've won. They're an innately self-interested lot. So, if "we want to inspire our users," we need to show them that we genuinely "care about how fabulous they are. How fast they are. How many awards they might win as a result of using our products or services." We need to make that human-to-human connection and let them know that consuming our offerings will move them in a positive direction. But, as this article on speaking engagements for attorneys evinces, generating and sustaining consumer passion is not a key marketing objective of the legal industry. Indeed, in chronicling why "[s]peaking opportunities for attorneys represent a strong marketing, public relations, and business development tool," the piece nowhere suggests that they provide an unrivaled opportunity to convey what we do (to borrow wording from the above-cited post) "in terms of how it helps the user kick ass."

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments

This post and another from Andy Havens' legal marketing blog got me thinking. They both discuss law firm marketing and branding, with "brand" defined by Andy as a "corporate personality." When contemplating their business brand, Andy challenges firms to consider their "personality" and what sets them "apart from other firms" as a collective enterprise. He goes on to caution that a firm "can't [and shouldn't] be everything to everyone." Indeed, he says, brands evolve from a business commitment to stressing "the importance of certain values over others." This is very good advice that applies equally well to solo practitioners. As I've discussed before, it's difficult, if not impossible, to forge and sustain solid attorney-client relationships unless we first take time to pinpoint our core values - the fusion of personal beliefs and business philosophies that's unique to us. This core valuation is like our fingerprints or DNA. It reflects who we are and provides a reliable way for others to identify us. If we don't know, publicize and promote our own core values, consumers seeking the right client-lawyer fit can't readily distinguish our legal services from the rest of the pack.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments

Perhaps it's a spring thing, but the topic of office design and aesthetic seems to be on people's minds these days. I recently wrote about it here. And the ABA's Law Practice Magazine devotes much of its current issue to the subject. In this article, we learn the basics of leasing appropriate office space and consulting with design professionals. Included is a handy list of the Top 6 Space Planning Mistakes and a Space Design Plan Checklist. Another piece tours us through a law firm that's embraced the unique design "idea that physical space should reflect and enhance the activities conducted within it." In this form-follows-function environment, there are no private offices. Instead, it boasts "seven distinct spaces, each dedicated to a specific litigation task. There are rooms for conferencing, researching, pleading and briefing, litigation data input, trial production and case brainstorming, plus a 'Big Room' for mediation, jury research and mock trials." Adding to the design article roundup is this one listing 45 things to consider when planning office space, such as: community, values, health, firm culture and fun. On a related note, if you're gearing up to reorganize your office or home, check out my friend Pam Schiller Socolow's excellent Family Facts site for expert tips like the ones featured in this recent article.

• Send To A Friend
• Print This Article
• Comments