distress and change in the legal profession
Dick Richards of Come Gather Round has a great set of posts on the nexus between distress and change. In the initial commentary, Richards writes that distress is a prerequisite to any change in our lives. So, he concludes, “if you manage others and they need to change, don’t shield them from distress. If friends or family members need to change, don’t shield them from distress.”
In a follow-up post, Richards tells us how his theory played out for one minor league catcher with major league dreams. When an interested big league team passed on him, the player asked the team’s General Manager why he lost out. Instead of shielding him from the harsh reality, the manager explained exactly why the man would never be a major leaguer. Although this was an incredible blow, the man was later grateful for the opportunity it afforded him to change course and move on to a successful career in business.
Like Richards, I’ve always believed that some of the most positive changes we make in our lives derive from difficult times and situations that cause us pain, anxiety and uncertainty. This is actually good news for the legal profession, which is suffering from the collective distress and discontent of many lawyers. We seem to be reaching that critical point in this ailing business trajectory when resistance to change is ebbing and firms and professional associations are looking for ways to optimize our lives in the law.
In my Web wanderings today, I saw that Rob Millard of The Adventure of Strategy blog has also picked up on Richards’ post, applying its core message to the change process in professional service firms. In giving his take on the subject, Millard states that “an appropriate degree of distress is a critical ingredient for overcoming resistance to change.” He also sets out a very handy formula to back his position.
