Leading and Managing a Sustainable Law Firm: Tactics and Strategies for a Rapidly Changing Profession

By Stephen Mabey

The author is one of those rare executives who not only understood competent administration, but also high-level strategic thinking. It is a rarity to find both characteristics existing in a person. His breadth and depth of understanding operations and strategy is unique among law firm leadership. He has always been a prolific writer and his thoughtful erudite writings have been greatly enjoyed over the years. His breadth of understanding and knowledge regarding administration and leadership is as fulsome as anyone could be. But it is his down to earth advice about "what to do" that adds immensely to the value of his writings. No wasteful jargon, self-aggrandizement's, but simply good clear commentary and advice.

Clear, down to earth and practical advice on a wide range of topics such as leadership, innovation, strategic planning, financial management, legal project management, among other topics, is difficult to find in one book. This book should be on everyone's bookshelf who has a managerial or leadership role in a law firm. In fact any lawyer who wants to better understand effective operations and management in a law firm should possess a copy. Readers will quickly begin to underline and highlight many areas that will benefit them in their work in a law firm and the book will quickly become dog-eared.

• Language: English
• Publisher: BookBaby
• Release date: Jul 19, 2021
• ISBN: 9781098383206

Book preview

cover.jpg

Leading and Managing a Sustainable Law Firm:

Tactics and Strategies for a Rapidly Changing Profession

©2021 Stephen Mabey

All rights reserved. This book or any portion thereof may not be reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the publisher except for the use of brief quotations in a book review.

print ISBN: 978-1-09838-319-0

ebook ISBN: 978-1-09838-320-6

Index

Foreword by Tom Clay

Introduction

Co-author Bios

I – Leadership

II – Management

III – New World Order

IV – Profitability

V – Repeat Challenges

VI – Various & Sundry

Full Article Index – Sorted by category & then alphabetical.

Foreword by Tom Clay

I was honored that Steve Mabey asked me to pen the foreword to his new book. I hope that the following helps you to come to understand that you need to have this book on your bookshelf, if you want to be a highly successful law firm leader or manager.

I have had a 43-year career as a management consultant to the legal profession. As such I have met hundreds of people involved in administration and leadership roles in law firms. I had the good fortune to meet Steve Mabey 15 years ago when he was the Director, Finance and Administration of one of my clients. We worked closely together on several projects and it quickly became apparent to me that Steve was one of those rare executives who not only understood competent administration, but also high-level strategic thinking. It is a rarity to find both characteristics existing in a person. I learned very quickly that he was considered an invaluable strategic advisor to other leaders in the law firm and worked extremely well with support staff, demonstrating a high level of EQ. Frankly, His breadth and depth of understanding of operations and strategy are unique among law firm leadership.

When Steve left his law firm to begin a consulting career, I had no doubt that he would be a success. We have referred work to one another. That is the highest compliment a consultant can pay to another consultant. I knew that anyone I sent to Steve would be in good, capable and competent hands.

Steve has always been a prolific writer and I have greatly enjoyed his thoughtful erudite writings over the years. His breadth of understanding and knowledge regarding administration and leadership is as fulsome as anyone could be. But it is his down to earth advice about what to do that adds immensely to the value of his writings. No wasteful jargon, self-aggrandizements, but simply good clear commentary and advice. I so appreciated his writings that I often sent them to my clients.

Having written hundreds of articles myself, I have come to realize that clear, down to earth and practical advice is always appreciated by readers. Finding a wide range of topics such as leadership, innovation, strategic planning, financial management, legal project management, among other topics, is difficult to find in one book. Steve has put it all in this book and in my opinion, it should be on everyone’s bookshelf who has a managerial or leadership role in a law firm. In fact, I would recommend it to any lawyer who wants to better understand effective operations and management in a law firm. I cannot think of another volume of work that covers so much important ground regarding law firms. I suspect that readers will quickly begin to underline and highlight many areas that will benefit them in their work in a law firm and the book will quickly become dog-eared. To me that is the mark of a valuable and useful book.

Keep your pen and notepad handy as you read this book, as you will be compelled to make note of many recommendations and advice contained herein.

Thomas S. Clay

Altman Weil, Inc.

Introduction

I have had the good fortune to walk the talk of Find something you love to do, and you’ll never have to work a day in your life.

For the past 35 years, I have had the true pleasure of working in the legal profession as an Administrator, Officer and finally as a Consultant. I have benefited both professionally and personally from working alongside a variety of lawyers and other professionals, all of whom were generous in their mentoring, friendship and even tough love when it was needed.

Over this time frame, I have been inducted as a Fellow of the College of Law Practice Management; participated for more than 25 years in a senior management role with a 200+ lawyer multi-office law firm; and finally, but not least by any stretch of the imagination, provided advice and counsel to small and mid-size law firms for the past eleven (11) years.

Clients have been generous in their testimonies of my efforts to leverage my experiences on their behalf- His advice and the solutions were tailored to our unique needs and business context; Steve possesses that rare ability to bluntly deliver tough and practical business advice while maintaining his personal warmth and good humour; Stephen has been invaluable in assisting with and guiding us through our strategic planning process. His broad knowledge and experience, combined with his engaging and inclusive facilitation style, promote thoughtful and productive discussion among our partners; and Steve always pushes the leading edge in terms of new ideas and new ways to carry on business.

Along the way, I have managed to author and co-author over 100 articles on law firm leadership and management that have been published in legal periodicals in the United States and Canada. The interest expressed in these articles has been very gratifying and after encouraging discussions with colleagues, has led to my decision to compile them in a book.

I would be totally remiss if I did not acknowledge my family members whose support allowed me to do what I love including two wives; five children; five grandchildren and my brother Mike.

The introduction would be longer than the book if I tried to list everyone who has provided guidance and assistance along the way. I will never be able to truly express my gratitude and appreciation, but I hope they know the heartfelt depth and gratitude of my simple Thank You!

To Tom Clay, the Dean of Law Firm Consultants, thank you for agreeing to write a foreword for my book. The legal profession is losing wise counsel when Tom retires later this year.

It is my hope that the writings in this book will provide guidance and advice to those that are tasked with leading and managing their firms through the ever-changing legal profession.

Co-author Bios

Colin Cameron

Colin Cameron is the founder of Profits for Partners Management Consulting Inc. Colin has been advising professional service firms for more than 25 years and led Clark Wilson LLP as its Chief Operating Officer, a major Vancouver law firm with 85 lawyers and more than 150 staff., to become one of the most profitable firms in British Columbia.

In May 2009, Colin established Profits for Partners. He advises professional firms in key areas related to profitability.

Colin can be reached at [e-mail].

Mia Hempey, MBA

Mia Hempey is the Chief Executive Officer for Nelligan Law. Prior to joining the firm, Mia was president of ctc TrainCanada, recognized as one of the largest corporate training providers in Canada. She also founded and was president of CTE Solutions, a local technology training company, which she later sold to a national training business. Before she was an entrepreneur, Mia held various senior management positions at high-tech companies in the region.

In 2009, Mia received the Businesswoman of the Year – Entrepreneur award from the Women’s Business Network of Ottawa, and in 2005 she was the recipient of the Ottawa Business Journal’s 40 Under 40 award.

In 2021, of the five nominees for Excellence Awardees for Managing Partner by Canadian Law Awards Mia was the only non-lawyer candidate.

In 2021, Mia was the only non-lawyer candidate of the five nominees for Managing Partner of the Year an Excellence Award given out by Canadian Law Awards.

Mia can be reached at [e-mail].

Michael Mabey, MBA

Michael Mabey is Vice President, Client Solutions, Americas for SKIM. Mike has extensive marketing, strategy and marketing research experience in pharmaceuticals, healthcare, electric and gas utilities, and manufacturing. His focus is on understanding client needs and identifying and collaborating on solutions to their marketing and strategic challenges.

Mike has authored and co-authored more than a dozen articles for publications including Pharmaceutical Executive, Chief Learning Officer, Quirks, Lexpert, Legal Management, Pipeline & Gas Journal, Energy.com, Gas Utility Report, E Source, Restructuring Today, Gas Daily, and Spark. He is a frequent speaker, with clients, at national conferences including Pharmaceutical Market Research Group National Conference, Direct to Consumer Advertising National Conference, IIR’s The Market Research Event and, PMRG Institute.

Michael can be reached at [e-mail].

Karen Mackay, MBA (deceased)

Unfortunately, Karen who was a colleague, mentor and good friend passed away in January 2021 and so never had the opportunity to share in celebrating the birth of this book.

Karen was recognized for her ability to assist law firm leadership and individual lawyers through some of their most difficult challenges. Her specialties: planning, facilitation and coaching skills; law firms and the professional talent within them; leadership and management; strategy and governance; crisis management, succession planning, and exit strategies. But there is solace in being reminded that, Those we love never truly leave us. There are things that death cannot touch.

See you later, my friend.

John Remsen Jr., MBA

John created The Managing Partner Forum, the nation’s richest source of information and the most highly acclaimed conference series for leaders of mid-sized law firms. More than 1,250 managing partners and leaders from more than 950 law firms in 43 states have participated in 28 leadership conferences. Each week, he publishes and distributes The MPF Weekly, an electronic newsletter distributed to more than 9,000 law firm leaders. For more information, visit ManagingPartnerForum.org.

In 2013, John was elected as a Fellow of the College of Law Practice Management in recognition of his 25 years of demonstrated expertise in law firm leadership and management. Founded in 1994, the College honours those who inspire excellence and innovation in law practice management. Membership is by invitation only and includes just 200 individuals. In 2016, John was recognized by Law Dragon as one of the Top 100 Consultants and Strategists to the legal profession. In 2017, John was recognized as one of the world’s top leaders and influencers in the business of law by the Association of International Law John formed The Remsen Group, a consulting firm that works exclusively with law firms to help them develop and implement long-term strategic objectives to improve cohesiveness, performance, and profitability. Since 1997, he has worked with over 400 law firms and thousands of lawyers. Most of his clients are smaller and mid-size commercial law firms, ranging in size from 15 to 200 lawyers.

John can be reached at [e-mail].

Jane Southren, LLB, Law. JD, Law

Drawing on her extensive experience as a successful litigation partner and in-house business development director for a major law firm, Jane Southren is a powerhouse coach, mentor, and advisor to her many professional services clients. Whether they are lawyers, accountants or other service professionals, Jane helps her clients develop the relationships, habits, and profiles they need to attract the work they want and build practices they love.

Jane takes a refreshingly different approach. Jane demystifies the process and makes it a personalized, specific undertaking that her clients understand, and even…enjoy! Whether engaging her services to take an existing practice to the next level, navigate a transition or help them get ‘unstuck’, Jane’s clients rave about her coaching and training as some of the best investments they’ve made in their professional development.

Jane can be reached at [e-mail].

I – Leadership

A fresh look at strategy

A leading lawyer versus a lawyer leading

A plea for action

Engaged lawyers are better lawyers

Innovate or abdicate

Just saying . . . some things about the profession

Law firm leadership

Law firm leadership – By the numbers

Law firm style leadership... same bus, different seat

Leadership – Has it ever been more important?

Leadership and other G words

Leadership inspired agility

Learned helplessness

Lifetime achievement award presented to the legal profession Challenge management

More than ever the time is now for female-led leadership In both legal departments and law firms

New voice but same words

Observations from the inaugural MPF Leadership Academy

Nobody’s drinking the Kool-Aid

Out with the old in with the new (maybe)

Questions that should be asked and answered by partners

The No Asshole Rule by Robert I. Sutton, Ph.D.

A fresh look at strategy

Co-authored with Karen MacKay

Imagine a process where partners have a hand in creating that future.

We read a story a while ago about a couple who decided to retire in seven years and then sail the world. They weighed every decision against that goal. They asked, does this decision get us closer to that goal or push it further away? It was that simple. Indeed, regarding a lot of decisions before them, decision-making just got a whole lot simpler.

So, what about your firm? How do you decide between the various options for investing your time and money? What is important to you as an individual, a group and a firm? We speculate that some law firms claiming success in achieving their strategic targets have done so by shooting first and calling whatever they hit their target. Still, others tell us that they are successful in spite of themselves – they’ve encountered more good luck than good management.

Lessons from the Past

Many partners have reached the end of a planning process only to feel frustrated and without any sense of accomplishment. They tell us that perhaps the plan was the work of few who sought partnership approval or the result of a partnership effort that focused on the voices of a few of the usual suspects who spoke up and participated. Still, others have given up in defeat for a myriad of reasons. These reasons generally fall into four main categories:

Starting in the Middle – Many firms take the development of a mission statement as a starting point, which normally heightens many lawyers’ inherent skepticism and is the equivalent of building a house starting on the first floor rather than the foundation.

Destination vs. Journey – Many consultants, and in turn firms, have approached strategic planning as though the document drafted at the end of the exercise was the critical product, rather than understanding that the process and interactions among the partners are where the real value lies.

Complexity vs. Simplicity – Many people believe that the planning process must look five years out, it must address all the perceived sins of the firm and it must leave nothing to interpretation. This often results in a grossly overwritten document. In their eyes, the value of the process is measured by the length or weight of the document and the number of so-called action items.

Approval vs. Buy-in – Because some partners believe that a large group can’t develop a cohesive plan, a committee often takes charge of the planning in many firms and presents its written plan for approval by the partners. They often mistake consent by the other partners as an actual buy-in by them.

It doesn’t have to be this way.

Imagine a planning cycle that gives partners an opportunity to seriously consider what they aspire to as individuals and as groups, to realize and value what makes their firm unique. Imagine a process where partners have a hand in creating that future. Now imagine the momentum when every partner knows how each client matter, he or she opens, every talk he or she agrees to give, and every hiring decision fits. Does this decision get us closer to our goal or push it further away?

Starting at the Foundation: Values – Agreeing on what the partners value is the only foundation upon which a successful strategizing process can be based. If our individual values guide our behaviour, and our collective behaviour creates the culture – what are the values that we share, and what are the values that we are prepared to enforce?

What are these values we speak of that form the foundation of a strategic planning process? Simply, they fall into three categories: contribution, behaviour and character.

Contribution – What do partners do to make the firm stronger? These might include financial productivity, participation in firm management, involvement in the community and the profession, development of future partners, recruiting and mentoring.

Behaviour – These traits include valuing teamwork, a strong work ethic, professional drive, adherence to firm policies, fiscal responsibility and treating others with respect.

Character – Character is measured by firm-mindedness, ethical standards, loyalty to the firm and partners, and protecting and enhancing the firm’s reputation.

The purpose of the foundation phase of the strategizing stage is to develop a set of values that the partners can define and about which they are able to articulate examples of positive and negative behaviour. Further, the partners must define how these values will be fostered and enforced. Finally, if it is true that you get what you pay for, the partners must decide how these values will be reflected in the allocation of profit.

A Journey vs. a Destination

A planning process is an opportunity for partners to step out of their practice and work on their business – even if only for a few hours. Embracing the exercise as a process creates a unique opportunity for dialogue among the partners and for them to work collaboratively irrespective of firm size. This is its true value, and it dramatically increases the odds of making progress toward a few common goals.

There are three stages to a process-oriented approach:

Strategic thinking

Strategic action process

Annual execution process

Working on the Business: Thinking – If you begin this process at a meeting, the results will likely be biased by the usual suspects who contribute in that setting. Rather, give every partner an opportunity to reflect on a range of issues before the meeting. Use surveys, interviews or both. It’s imperative to find a way to meet the communication needs of your colleagues.

Achieving some common ground certainly requires dialogue among the partners. When well facilitated, the thinking process gets partners working together to identify the key aspects to focus on that will be the pillars of the plan. Key areas might include industries, practice areas or client groups, talent management, finances, incomes and market position.

Working on the Business: Action Planning – For each pillar, your process needs to allow the partners the opportunity to work together to (1) define achievement, (2) clarify what is required and (3) determine what is required to execute.

This is the stage where the proverbial rubber begins to hit the road, as you move from concepts to the broader goals to the initiatives that will support these goals to the objectives that in turn support accomplishing the initiatives. So that we don’t lose anyone in an abstract discussion of what is a goal, what is an initiative and what is an objective – and they are not one and the same – the following illustrates examples of the three.

Goal: Growth of the Firm

Initiatives – Business development in new industries

Business process management

Develop new service offerings

Objectives – Execute practice group plans

Implement industry service teams

Automate client intake processes

Perform a review of all vendors

Deploy key performance indicator dashboards for partners

Survey key clients on their alternative fee arrangement needs

Working on the Firm: Annual Execution Process – The third stage is the annual execution process. This addresses the aligning of specific actions and steps with the objectives identified – and makes this part of the planning and budgeting process. As David H. Maister said many years ago,

What you do with your billable time determines your current income, but what you do with your nonbillable time determines your future.

Action often requires making choices about resources – your nonbillable time and some money. Either way, it is about making choices that get you closer to your goal or further from it. The following are some straightforward questions that need to be asked and answered in this implementation phase:

What is to be done?

When will it be done, and how much will be done in the current fiscal year to achieve any objective?

Who will own it (read: a partner) and who will do it (read: a manager or director who can do the heavy lifting)?

What will be the budget, both in terms of nonbillable time and money?

A Note of Caution

While potential failure is a real risk during each step, that risk is highest in the annual execution process. The reasons for this vary from situation to situation, but some common ones include these:

Things begin to creep into the annual business plan that don’t align with any of the objectives generated in the strategic action process – and end up diverting time and resources away from the objectives.

There is no real accountability for the execution of the action step by the owner of the action; rather, the focus is fixated on the doer, who normally is in a position of less authority.

The timelines are sufficiently vague that many action steps suffer from a last-minute, last-ditch effort, and the outcomes reflect this lack of timely planning and execution.

The list of reasons why firms need to focus on a framework for the future is a long one and includes such challenges as an ever-changing economic environment, client orientation toward more for less, technology change, firm convergence and generational differences. The old adage If you don’t know where you are going, how will you know when you get there? is very apt in the legal industry today. But it does not have to be that way. Whether you call it strategic planning, future planning or creating a road map, leaders are encouraged to create a framework for the firm’s future.

There is always a range of appetite for investment – of effort, time and money – in the future of a firm. Clarity of purpose will go a long way toward reducing uncertainty and increasing the engagement of lawyers and staff in your firm. Without values as your rudder, a vision of your future as your sails, and a compass to guide and measure your actions, your firm may well be condemned to drifting around until everyone abandons ship or a mutiny occurs. Or worse yet, it’s just another planning shipwreck washed up on some unintended destination.

This article was first published in the American Bar Association’s Law Practice magazine.

A leading lawyer versus a lawyer leading

Are you in tune with what it feels like to work for you?

One of the single greatest challenges facing many law firms is the effective transition in their leadership as the enterprise grows. As always, let me start with my underlying premise for this month’s column – the titular leaders of law firms must be lawyers.

So why, might you reasonably ask, is it such a challenge given the level of intelligence found in law firms?

There are two main obstacles that intelligence alone can’t overcome:

How to function as a team, and

How to be a good boss.

Many lawyers in most firms, irrespective of the size, practise essentially in a solo mode and when thrust into a leadership role are confronted immediately with the need to function in team mode.

The transitional challenges are fivefold:

To be a successful team requires continuous interdependent work rather than the occasional episode they endured in the past.

The selection criteria for the best members to be on the team changes from intellectual brilliance and friendship to adding strategic value to the issue and being able to put the firm first.

Great teams need to both openly share information essential for full decision-making and make decisions together on critical issues versus keeping strategy close to the vest and calling all of the shots.

Team meetings need to focus on the abstract strategic success of the firm and not on the cause du jour or a specific file/issue of the day.

The rules of engagement for successful teams are not opt-in/opt-out in nature and apply whether with the team or with others.

Leading a team is a learned skill and most firms do not invest in teaching or providing the resources for potential leaders to develop the necessary skills. As a result, law firms seem doomed to meet Albert Einstein’s definition of insanity when it comes to achieving true leadership: The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

The second of the obstacles I have identified is about how to be a good boss. Robert Sutton, PhD author of the book The No Asshole Rule, has recently penned another book titled Good Boss, Bad Boss and provided again some astute insight into the differences between the two types of bosses.

Late in the book, the author raises one key question that good bosses should constantly ask themselves: Are you in tune with what it feels like to work for you? In most law firms this type of introspective feedback does not exist; in fact, it is a challenge to get downward feedback to the lawyers who worked on a file let alone upward feedback to the responsible partner. The moral of the story is that bosses should be judged not only for what they accomplish but also how the people they are leading feel along the way.

In addition to the dearth of introspection and 360-degree evaluations in many firms, the mindset of great bosses is counterintuitive to that promulgated by law firms. The author identifies the following characteristics of the mindsets of great bosses:

Balancing between managing too much and too little,

Focusing on the long term versus the short term (marathon versus a sprint),

Accepting to focus on the small things and the big things will take care of themselves.

Accepting that if you become self-centred and oblivious to what others need, subordinates will emulate your behaviour, and

Doggedly protecting their people even at risk to their own position.

Lawyers are inherently micromanagers driven in part by the manner in which they practise law and in part by the way they are compensated. To then ask them to step back and in part trust their fate/results to a group of both lawyers and non-lawyers (the profession’s word not mine) runs totally contrary to their experiences and is no easy task.

Many lawyers look only as far ahead as the next draw or paycheque and are reluctant to consider any initiatives that might have a longer payback, particularly if there is any uncertainty in being able to assure them of the results. Again, finding a mindset, among the partners, that is prepared to look at partners draws five years down the road, not five weeks, while not impossible, is certainly daunting.

Control is a trait that is drilled into lawyers both consciously and subconsciously from the outset of law school through to being an associate and partner. Like any strength, control can become a weakness if used out of context and such is the case when many lawyers attempt to carry it over to leading/managing their firms. They can often become so bogged down in controlling the big picture that the small steps required to achieve the big picture are either not executed or executed poorly.

Law firms, like many organizations, are not immune to the concept that success breeds both contempt and arrogance. One form of proof of this is the very image the public has of the legal profession. The manner in which the lawyer chooses to handle this success can be seen in the staff that directly supports them, as who hasn’t been bossed around by an important lawyer’s staff? Yet, if raised with the lawyer they are not likely to acknowledge theirs or their staff’s behaviour.

Whether it is driven by practising in solo mode, the compensation system they operate under, the need for a positive shared perception of their work quality, paranoia about clients, or other influences, feeding their young to the lions is a fairly established norm in many firms.

Whether it is the assistant that you never say anything bad about to his or her face but privately demand that senior staff replace immediately; or the associate who is never advised what he or she did wrong but is just frozen out of work by the partner; or the write-off of associates’ time at billing by the partner for sloppy work, not sloppy management of the file; or numerous other scenarios – I got your back is not a talk that is walked consistently and therefore instilled in the mindsets of lawyers.

The great news for firms is that both the skill to lead a team and the traits of a good boss can be learned. Those firms that invest the time and money into instilling these skills into potential future leaders will reap not only financial benefits when these lawyers move into positions of leadership but will also cultivate a culture that the best people, irrespective of their craft, will gravitate to over time.

Until next month, remember as Mark Twain is reported to have said,

20 years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn’t do than by the ones you did do.

This article was first published in Canadian Lawyer magazine.

A plea for action

People estimate the average law school debt in Canada today is closer to $60K.

Individuals both inside and outside the legal profession have been working overtime to identify the problems facing the profession and speculating on the dire consequences if the profession ignores these problems. They are long on penetrating glimpses into the obvious but short on solutions.

Fair enough, as I too am not a great believer in cookie-cutter solutions as many firms are genuinely different so the solutions and their execution will vary from firm to firm.

But where the rubber hits the road for me is in the differentiation between core systemic problems and organizational problems. The former has to be addressed at a professional level because of their nature and magnitude and the latter at the individual firm level as they are more regional, practice, compensation, business generation, etc. in nature.

So, let’s focus on what should be seen as core systemic problems the profession must deal with if it is to regain (yes, that implies a loss) its stature not only with the users of legal services but with the providers themselves.

Now before this melts down into another of those dreaded problem identification pieces let me share how I think the profession needs to deal with developing solutions. It is quite simple: blue-sky thinking, generating creative ideas that are not limited by current thinking or beliefs. Yup (I can hear the 911 calls already) but I truly think the solution lies in various groups of lawyers from all aspects of the profession sitting down unbound by what exists today and focusing instead on what their profession could and should be.

The following excerpt, by Michael Birshan and Jayanti Kar in McKinsey Quarterly’s July 2012 edition, captures why this is a solution worthy of consideration:

We are entering the age of the strategist. A powerful means of coping with today’s more volatile environment is increasing the time a company’s top team spends on strategy. Involving more senior leaders in strategic dialogue makes it easier to stay ahead of emerging opportunities, respond quickly to unexpected threats, and make timely decisions.

So, if this is what the consumers of your legal services are doing why is the solution any different for the legal profession? Because lawyers are a profession and not a business, so the same rules don’t apply? Because such an approach is foreign to the profession’s culture? The excuses are numerous but in the final analysis, they are just that – EXCUSES!

The reason I would broaden the groups at the table to include private practice, in-house counsel, young, old, male, female, gay, non-gay, visible minority, immigrant, etc. is to ensure the participants generate creative ideas not limited by current thinking or beliefs.

I would call upon the law societies and local CBA chapters to organize and facilitate multiple sessions around their respective provinces but participate with their listening ears, not their telling voice. The law societies/CBA chapters can funnel their summaries up to a national level where an action plan would be developed and presented to all members for consideration and possible modification and then acted upon. The time frame for such an exercise is a maximum of 18 months from start to execution of the action strategy!

So, what are some of the systemic issues that should be included amongst those tackled by these blue-sky groups?

"Women now make up a majority of the law school class but that does not mean gender is no longer an issue in many law students’ experience," according to Osgoode Hall Law School dean Lorne Sossin.

But who loses when firms engage in ‘suicide pricing?’ Everyone else, from support staff to the working attorneys to everyone concerned with searching for sustainable business practices. . . . Especially when everyone agrees that we are in a changing industry and need to do a better job of communicating and delivering value. I am not optimistic – unless clients and firms start focusing on improving communication with each other, says a post on the Above the Law¹ blog.

The Law Society of Upper Canada released a report in 2008 that placed the average law school debt at $45,246. Tuition has been creeping up since then and, it’s fair to assume, so have debt loads. Several people estimate the average law school debt in Canada today is closer to $60,000.

A CNBC article, Courtroom drama: too many lawyers, too few jobs²notes: Going forward, the Bureau of Labor Statistics projects nearly 74,000 new lawyer jobs created in the U.S. over the next seven years. The growth is expected in areas including health law, intellectual property law, privacy law, and international law. But American law schools will graduate about 44,000 students each year during that time, and in doing the math, that means six new lawyers – not including older graduates – will be fighting it out for just one new job. And it is no different in Canada other than proportionately.

"Teaching students to think like a lawyer is still necessary but it is not sufficient for students to act like a lawyer soon after they graduate," writes John Lande in Reforming Legal Education to Prepare Law Students Optimally for Real-World Practice³ in the 2013 Journal of Dispute Resolution. "Although legal education has evolved in recent decades, the legacy of the Langdellian system makes it hard to combine instruction in legal doctrine, practical skills, and clinical experience. Recognizing the general problems of legal education is fairly easy. Solving them can be quite hard. Law schools serve many constituencies that have demanding and diverse interests."

Perhaps more than a call to action, it should be a plea for action as in the words of Henrik Ibsen:

A thousand words leave not the same deep impression as does a single deed.

This article was first published in Canadian Lawyer magazine.

---

1 http://abovethelaw.com/

2 https://www.cnbc.com/id/100569350

3 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2214989

Engaged lawyers are better lawyers

Lawyer engagement starts at the top. Your firm’s leaders have to be coaches.

Given the daily barrage of articles, newsletters and periodicals there is little room to doubt the competitive marketplace law firms find themselves in today. Textbooks, consultants, and other great prognosticators tell us the essence of winning in a competitive marketplace is being in the right place before the right time.

To do this, firms must either develop a breakout innovation – development effort that goes beyond new and improved into the realm of very different or self-re-inventing – or performance innovation – improve already established services or processes by adding new features, improving quality, reducing delivery times, or enhancing support services.

Either type of innovation requires a high level of engagement by your lawyers.

There is a story that goes something like this: A group of villagers is weaving a basket together. A wise man walks by and asks them what they are doing. The first says, I am pushing one straw against another. The second says, I am making a basket. The third villager answers, I’m helping a family carry food to feed the family. The last villager was engaged.

The Institute for Employment Studies in a 2003 study defined engagement as: a positive attitude held by the employee towards the organization and its values. An engaged employee is aware of business context and works with colleagues to improve performance within the job for the benefit of the organization. The organization must work to develop and nurture engagement, which requires a two-way relationship between employer and employee.

So, we are on the same page, I would define engagement for a law firm as the willingness of its lawyers to go beyond the call of duty to contribute to the firm’s success. It is equally important to understand what engagement is not, and that is simple satisfaction.

We all know lawyers who are satisfied but spend no time thinking about the clients or firm before 9 a.m. or after 5 p.m. – satisfied yes – engaged no (please note I didn’t say they had to be at the office or working on a specific matter)!

The benefits of engagement are simple but direct and include:

higher productivity,

higher efficiency,

client satisfaction,

lawyer retention,

attracting talent, and

improved morale.

Lawyers who are engaged greatly outperform their peers.

Assessing the level of lawyer engagement in your firm is not rocket science. It can be done by a few simple observations about:

whether they volunteer for tasks beyond the practice of law,

their willingness to put forward ideas and suggestions,

their un-induced willing collaboration with others, and

their passion or pull to come to the office.

So how do you ensure your firm offers an environment that engages its lawyers? The following are just a few ways to create such an environment:

Approach each lawyer as a source of unique knowledge with something valuable to contribute to the firm.

Make sure the lawyers have everything they need to do their jobs. Simply ask each lawyer, Do you have everything you need to be as good as you can be?

Communicate what’s expected of the lawyers – what the firm’s values and visions are, and how the firm defines success.

Get to know your lawyers, especially their goals, their stressors, what excites them, and how they each define success. Show an interest in their well-being and let them know that you will do what it takes (within reason) to enable them to feel fulfilled and balanced.

Make sure they are well trained in the critical skills that will help them interact and better communicate with their colleagues, clients, and the staff.

Constantly ask how you are doing in your lawyers’ eyes and be sure to accept feedback graciously and to express appreciation.

Stay away from participating in discussions that are destructive to individual lawyers or the firm and keep success stories alive.

Make sure lawyers are laughing with, and not at, each other.

Reward and recognize lawyers in ways that are meaningful to them and make sure you celebrate both accomplishments and efforts.

There’s a connection between a lawyer’s commitment to an initiative and the firm’s commitment to supporting it. Lawyers are exhausted and exasperated from program du jour initiatives that engage their passion and then fizzle out when the firm drops it because there is no short-term payback.

Lawyer engagement starts at the top. You need leaders who understand the keys to engagement and must be both committed to and active in the creation of an engaging environment. Your firm’s leaders have to be coaches. Firms are well served to invest in training their leadership team in the art of engagement.

One absolutely critical prerequisite for maintaining an environment that fosters engagement is that you deal promptly with disengaged lawyers. Speak to them to understand the root causes of concern and evaluate what, if anything, can be done to make changes to re-engage them. But deal with them.

Keeping disengaged lawyers in the medium to long term is costly not only in terms of morale and productivity but also in management time and attention. If managers’ time is taken by working on the disengaged, who is working to engage the others?

Until next month, remember, as Samuel Coleridge is alleged to have said:

Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm.

This article was first published in Canadian Lawyer magazine.

Innovate or abdicate

Never waste a good crisis.

In my Recapture your attitude of gratitude column, I included a brief section on innovation. Right up front let me disclose that like a blind pig finds an acorn occasionally; little did I know how important innovation was going to be to law firms in 2011.

There are two general forms of true innovation that firms can experience:

Breakout innovation – a development effort that goes beyond new and improved into the realm of very different or self-reinventing; and

Performance innovation – involves efforts to improve already established services or processes by adding new features, improving quality, reducing delivery times, or enhancing support services.

There will always be exceptions to any general rule, but the former type of innovation is found in firms that are successfully chasing the high-end legal work and the latter in firms that make their money (and good steady money it is) off more routine or commodity-type work and therefore strive to be low-cost leveraged firms.

The high-end work is generally found in the larger metropolitan centres, but even in these centres there seems to be less of it and the large quasi-national firms appear to be chasing, more so now than ever, some of the files felt to be too pedestrian for them in the past! But don’t get me wrong – no one is going to be holding a benefit concert for these firms any time in the near future. So given the vast majority of lawyers in North America who deal with routine/commodity-type work, this column will focus on how you might create a platform for innovation in your firm.

Innovation is not for the faint of heart. You will experience failure. If you are