Habit: the enemy of entropy

/1 Comment/in , , , /by

I’m not a physicist (I can barely spell the word) but as I remember it, the second law of thermodynamics is that entropy, which for purposes of this post only might be a synonym for chaos or disorder, tends to increase.  Another way of saying this is that systems tend to move from a state of higher organization to a state of lower organization.  I see that law play out, albeit in utterly non-scientific ways, in my life and in those of my clients.  A simple example is the level of order in my office.  At the beginning of the day, my desk is fairly tidy, and by the end of the day, it’s typically a mess; if I don’t neaten it at the end of the day, the cycle will just start again the next morning, with eventually disasterous results.  But when I do take the time to discard the things I no longer need, to stack papers, to return files and books to their proper spots, I have the pleasure of walking into a (relatively) orderly office.  And so, habit is the enemy of entropy.

Most of us have routines that allow our lives to function.  We typically brush our teeth in the same phase of getting ready for the day and for bed, we tend to drive to work or home in the same way, etc.  Professionally, the same kinds of activities keep our work lives on track: tidying the office, noting appointments on a calendar or PDA as soon as we make them, completing time sheets on a regular basis.  Although these tasks are in themselves rather small, they keep things running.  And that’s something to consider both in creating routines and in adhering to them.  Building a habit that supports you is a key skill for any lawyer.

Likewise, it’s worth noting that we all stray from our habits on occasion.  There’s nothing wrong with that, so long as we get back to the beneficial habit.  An example from my own life: last year, I joined a networking group and attended regularly.  If it was the third Thursday, I was at the meeting.  I enjoyed it, I made great contacts that produced business, and all was going well.  But then the group skipped a meeting.  And I was out of town for the next one.  Before I knew it, 8 months had passed, and I hadn’t been to the meetings.  Returning wasn’t hard, but it did take more effort than going as a part of my regular weekly habit.  I had to miss last month’s meeting, and I made sure that I’d made my appointment for the next meeting and that it was marked on my calendar in ink.  A part of suspending my regular practice is now planning to resume it — not because the habit itself is so important, but because it produces great results that I won’t get otherwise.

What habits or practices support you in being healthy, productive, happy, etc.?  Once you’ve identified them, pay attention when you stop following those routines.  There’s no harm in pausing; the key is to have a plan that will support you in resuming those patterns.  What’s yours?

Finders, minders, grinders, and binders

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Have you heard this old saw?  People used to say that law firms need four categories of lawyers: finders, minders, grinders, and binders.  It’s still true to some degree, though today’s atmosphere requires lawyers to develop their skills in each of these areas, rather than simply selecting the most comfortable skill set and roosting there.  So, let’s unpack what these labels mean… And then we’ll explore how a lawyer can identify her natural inclination, lead from that strength, and develop at least rudimentary skills in the areas that perhaps come less naturally.

First, definitions.  Finders are those who find the work, better known today as rainmakers.  Minders are those who perform administrative tasks and coordinate the efforts of the finders, grinders, and binders to be sure that the firm will run as a cohesive whole; examples include managing partners, the executive committee, team leaders, etc.  Grinders are those who grind out the client work, and binders are those who bring the members of a firm together by (for example) inviting a small group to lunch or recognizing achievements of the firm’s lawyers.

Chances are that just reading these definitions is enough to let you identify your area of strength.  If not, consider this brief list of questions.

*  Imagine a great opportunity for your firm.  Is the opportunity you thought of more in the practice, marketing, administration, or social area?

*  Do you feel that you’re acting in the highest and best service by being out in the world meeting people, billing time, or working on firm matters?

*  When you think you ought to drop by and congratulate a colleague on bringing in a big new client, winning a case, or receiving some award, do you actually do it?

*  Would you gladly trade billable hours for working on administrative matters?  Is administration important enough to do you take on both tasks?

*  How skilled are you at signing new clients?  Does your marketing tend to yield results fairly quickly?

Answers to these questions will point you toward your area of strength.  Although most of us tend to spend time shoring up our weak areas and working to improve them, studies show that people are much more effective when they spend development time making those strengths even stronger and figuring out how best to use them.  (This is the thesis of Now, Discover Your Strengths by Buckingham and Clifton, among others by Buckingham.)  Accordingly, it’s critical to recognize and leverage your natural abilities.

As recognized in this Altman Weil report, a lawyer today likely doesn’t have the luxury of  existing in only one dimension of the finder/minder/grinder/binder quartet.  (The report is directed to partners, but equally applicable to associates and sole practitioners, albeit in a different context.)  Though exceptions may exist by agreement of the members of a firm, each lawyer is asked to put each of these skills into play.  Though it isn’t necessary to become a virtuoso in each area, it’s critical to have some level of skill.

Frederick Shelton, a legal recruiter, argues persuasively that lawyers acquire these skills at different stages of their development in this article.  (It’s worth noting that Shelton considers minders to be those with responsibility for client contact — a reminder to check definition when somewhat arbitrary terms are being used.)  Although seniority does bring opportunities to develop these skills, even the most junior associate can begin developing them today.  How so?

Being a grinder is the expected role for a new(ish) lawyer, as the first few years out of school are focused on developing the craft of lawyering.  It’s important not to skimp on that stage.  However, there’s every reason to begin networking, which will lay the ground for development of finder skills.  Likewise, it’s never inappropriate to congratulate others in your office on their accomplishments, to send a note when a family member dies, or to take on the other “binder” tasks that create a collegial sense.  Finally, though it’s difficult to take on administrative tasks as a junior associate (though more possible in smaller firms), it’s incumbent on each lawyer to learn the business of the firm, which is step one toward acquiring the skills of a minder.  Other opportunities for developing these areas will arise, particularly if you’ve trained yourself to be aware of them.

Today, identify your area of strength as a finder, minder, grinder, or binder, and then notice over the course of the week whether (and how) you perform tasks in the other areas.  That’s step one in expanding your skills.

Networking: the top activity for business success.

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

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

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

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

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

Think multitasking is beneficial? Think again.

/0 Comments/in , , /by

I’ve been intending to post about a New York Times article I read a few months ago, and today’s the day.  I have noticed recently that I’m receiving a lot of emails informing me that the sender is now limiting the number of times she checks email in the course of a day, and to contract her by phone for pressing matters.  (More on why that is on another day.)

And yesterday, I happened upon a provocative — if rather old — article on CNN.com reporting on a test run by a London psychiatrist.  The study tested three groups in completing an IQ test: the first group worked only on the test; the second group worked on the test while receiving emails, phone calls, and text messages; and the third group worked only on the test but had smoked marijuana.  The first group, of course, performed the best; the pot-smokers came in second (down 4 points); and the distracted test-takers came in last by 10 points.  According to the researcher, juggling incoming messages has an effect equal to missing an entire night of sleep.

The article Slow Down, Brave Multitasker, and Don’t Read This in Traffic reports consistent results.  Neurobiological evidence indicates that the human brain simply can’t do two tasks at once, if the tasks require any mental processing.  In other words, we can walk and talk at the same time (most of us, anyway) but, as reported in the article, when study participants were asked to see an image of a vowel and then say the vowel and to hear a sound and press the correct key on a keyboard, participants experienced up to a second’s delay.  As the researcher who performed that test notes, a second usually isn’t a big issue, unless it’s a second’s delay in hitting the brakes while driving at 60 mph.  The researcher doesn’t use his cell phone while driving.

Another Study I’d seen reported elsewhere that reveals surprising effects of interruptions.  Observing “information workers” in high-tech companies showed that interruptions occur about every 10-and-a-half minutes.  (I found another source that, regrettably, I’ve misplaced suggesting that interruptions occur every 3 minutes — and my experience indicates that to be a much more believable number.)  On average, workers take 23 minutes to get back to the interrupted task, including a tour through two other unrelated tasks; and about 20% of the time, workers never do get back to the original work.

Now, what does this all mean?

1.  We work better when we avoid interruptions.  If you’re trying to get something accomplished, close your door, put your phone on do-not-disturb, and don’t check email.

For those of you who are hyperventilating now, try it.  It’s a big change, but it’s effective.  You can always ask you assistant to watch your email (consider, of course, that you’re creating an inefficiency there…) while you get accustomed to this idea.

2.  Work in focused blasts and build in recovery time.

Studies indicate that the ideal “focus” period is 45 minutes, with 15 minutes left for recovery.  Even if you choose to check email repeatedly throughout the day, consider checking it instead during your 15-minute recovery time.

3.  Devise methods to keep your place during interruptions.

Sometimes interruptions are unavoidable, and that tends to be more true for those lower on the totem pole.  Keep a pad nearby and make a fast note when you’re interrupted to remind you of where you left off.  Perhaps you can’t choose not to be interrupted, but everyone can say, “Hang on, let me finish this note so I won’t lose it.”

Are you busy — Or productive?

/0 Comments/in , , , , /by

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How can your practice become known?

/4 Comments/in , , , /by

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

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

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

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

Create a unique experience for your clients.

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

Be active and visible in the community.

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

Be clear about what makes you different.

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

Follow-up from the NALP conference

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

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

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

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

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

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

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

Understanding your client’s business

/1 Comment/in , , /by

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

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

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

Engagement: Another name for work/life balance?

/8 Comments/in , , , /by

Regular readers of this blog know that I’m a proponent of finding work/life balance AND a proponent of excellent client service.  Though others may disagree, I think the two can and must co-exist, and frankly I question whether a lawyer can deliver top-notch legal services without some form of balance — recognizing that “balance” means radically different things to different people.

But “work/life balance” tends to take a beating at times.  Some attorneys and some commentators think that work/life balance is a PC phrase for lazy lawyers.  And I’ve been recently mulling over another way of expressing WLB ideas such as having a life outside practice, creating time and habits that support both practice and personal life, and using energy boosts from recreation to buoy the focus and output required by practice.

Peter Vajda recently commented on “engagement,” which he went on to describe as “the experience of an employee who is fully involved in, and enthusiastic about, his or her work. Folks who are ‘engaged’ proactively care about the future of their organization and are most often willing to invest, over and above, to ensure their organization’s success.”  Well said, Peter.

That thought dovetails with a book I finished reading over the weekend called The Power of Full Engagement.  I’ve recommended the book before based on a preliminary skim, but now that I’ve read it all the way through, it’s going on my “highly recommended resource” list for clients.  Its premise is that most of us move through our careers as if we’re marathon runners, working from stress to stress with little or no time for recovery — and that doesn’t turn out so well.  Instead, the authors recommend periods of strategic disengagement from work to facilitate regeneration, and that disengagement from work is generally engagement in some personal pursuit, whether that’s family time or an artistic hobby.  In other words, it’s what I’d call work/life balance in motion, the attribute of being a person who is a lawyer rather than a lawyer who also does XYZ on the side.

So, perhaps we should be talking about how lawyers can become more fully engaged in their practices and lives? Readers, I’m curious: does the concept of “full engagement” resonate with you more than the idea of “work/life balance”?

For new(ish) associates: Speak up!

/3 Comments/in , , /by

Dan Hull, of What About Clients? blog fame, posted a key question that associates (really, all lawyers) must be able to answer at a moment’s notice: What are you thinking?  As Dan put it, “If a neuron fires in a brilliant young lawyer’s head, and no one hears it go off, did it even happen?”  Dan writes to encourage more senior lawyers to ask junior associates what they’re thinking and to teach those lawyers to volunteer their thoughts, and I couldn’t agree more.

But new(ish) lawyers are often uncomfortable volunteering their ideas, feeling that because they’re new and have a lot to learn about practice, it’s better (as Abraham Lincoln advised) to “remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”  This fallacious belief is what Mark Herrmann, author of The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law, refers to as the “potted plant” mistake.  That “wisdom” backfires in the law firm setting, though.  A new lawyer must add value immediately, and sharing questions or insights is the quickest way to do that.  (It goes without saying that these insights must be well-considered, right?)

What I like about Dan’s advice is that the simple question, “What are you thinking?” creates an atmosphere of collegial inquiry.  It not only allows more senior lawyers to get an insight into a newer lawyer’s thinking process, whether to reap the benefit of brilliance or to dispel a mistaken assumption before it causes harm, but also it open the opportunity for the newer lawyer to learn how the more senior attorneys are analyzing the issue at hand, sifting the important from the irrelevant, and cooking up an approach most likely to meet the client’s goals.

So, new(ish) lawyers, volunteer your thoughts, and ask what others working on your cases are thinking.  (Don’t forget to ask paralegals and secretaries, too.  You might be surprised at the insight that these people can have, and it’s a painless way to remind yourself that non-attorney legal professionals can make a variety of valuable contributions if provided the opportunity.)