Amazing Firms, Amazing Practices

Is your “winning streak” about to become a “losing streak”?  I believe it is likely unless you prepare for the test you didn’t ask for but are about to take.  Let's be honest, most law firms have had a pretty good run and your partners are well accustomed to it.  Will your partners understand what a decrease is? Will your firm maintain the winning attitude that brought you this far?  If you don’t think the next few miles of road are bumpier than you're used to then the following may be of little interest (except perhaps for the reference to “denying the facts”).

I Irecommend that you visit (or revisit) Confidence - How Winning Streaks and Losing Streaks Begin and End by Harvard’s Rosabeth Moss Kanter. 

Rosabeth Moss Kanter's biography for those interested

Confidence is a road map that helps you react more constructively than you might otherwise have to the challenges you will face (like this deteriorating economy).  The losing streak is fraught with a disease whose symptoms will infect your people - they include::

• Stop communicating
• Criticize and blame
• Disrespect others
• Become isolated
• Focus inward
• Let inequalities develop and persist
• Lose initiative
• Forget goals and aspirations
• Spread negativity
• Deny Facts

• Accountability
• Collaboration
• Initiative

Check out Soundview Summaries and getAbstract.  If there are others, let me know.

PUNCHLINE:  Put Rosabeth Moss Kanter on your informal advisory team by buying the book or subscribing to one of the summary services above.  You cannot prevent the legal profession from having a losing streak here – but you can prevent your firm from having one.

After a 15 year COO/Executive-Director drought, Morrison & Foerster is making a move that is more akin to the behaviour of British and Australian firms than American ones – they have looked outside the firm and indeed outside the legal profession to fill their new Chief Operating Officer Position.  This is a bold move which according to Chairman Keith Wetmore will give Mo Fo a competitive advantage.  According to the same article, Pat Cavaney, formerly Senior Vice President of Hewlett-Packard, will free up the three firm Managing Partners to manage the practices more and the operations less (and also spend more time practicing law).

PUNCHLINE:  I wish Mo Fo and Cavaney every success.  I offer the polite caution, however, that I have watched some very talented, intelligent and accomplished individuals who were not themselves lawyers get devoured in the law firm environment by the ferocious independence of many individual partners who felt quite comfortable in their belief that a non-lawyer could not possibly handle the job and that criticism could be heaped upon him (or her) in abundance.   Having said that, I am aware of several notable successes where non-lawyers have maneuvered the maze with aplomb and have gained the internal respect that has allowed them to get on with the job.  Pat Cavaney’s impressive background will help a lot but it won’t be enough without some serious help from the firm’s senior leadership and a lot of skill on his part - which he likely possesses based on the following (published by Techie Evangelist while he was Senior Vice President at Hewlett-Packard):

As Senior Vice President, Pat Cavaney is responsible for Global Delivery Operations & Information Technology for Technology Services, Technology Solutions Group. In this role, Cavaney manages the Global Delivery Program Office; the Group Information Office (IT + R&D); the Engagement PMO; Customer Operations; Applications Services Delivery; Total Customer Experience, Quality, and Business Process Management; and Compliance & Maturity Assessment.

Prior to his current role, Cavaney managed the implementation of the company’s merger integration plans for the services businesses of HP and Compaq. The scope of this effort encompassed all HP Services functions and lines of business including Customer Support, Consulting & Integration, and Managed Services.

Cavaney also served as the Worldwide General Manager of HP Education Services. He was responsible for managing HP’s broad portfolio of learning services that help businesses enhance knowledge and skills and improve business performance.

With a career spanning more than 20 years, Cavaney’s prior experience includes serving as the Worldwide General Manager of the HP Services Year 2000 Program. He was responsible for directing the sales, marketing, delivery, and administration efforts of HP Services to ensure the Y2K readiness of HP product offerings and customer support infrastructure.

Born in Pasadena, California, Cavaney holds a bachelor’s degree in finance and a master’s degree in business administration from the University of Southern California. He is based in Palo Alto, California.

I believe the legal profession has much to gain by importing talent from outside and I wish Mo Fo and Pat Cavaney every success.

Thank you to the ABA Journal for serving as a source for this post - see their November 20th article:  Non-Lawyer Now at Helm of 1,000-Attorney Law Firm

The New York Times Business section included an article yesterday called:  For Lawyers, Perks to Fit a Lifestyle.

The article alluded to a variety of perks including money, candied apples, milkshakes, car discounts, valet services, wine, office parties, in-office gourmet meals on silver platters, nap rooms, child care, emergency nanny services, sabbaticals and even an occasional masseuse.

Perhaps this was the most important perk mentioned:

Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, a 600-lawyer firm based in New York, offers employees a service akin to a personal issues coach and psychotherapist through a deal with Corporate Counseling Associates of Manhattan. The consulting firm has a battery of staff psychologists and social workers to provide advice on issues including stress, anxiety, depression and divorce.

While many companies have offered employee assistance programs over the years, few have Ph.D. psychologists on staff.

A spokeswoman for Fried, Frank, Paula Zirinsky, said, “We want employees to be successful in their personal as well as their work lives.”

PUNCHLINE:  Some of my law-firm clients have very serious challenges dealing with individuals for whom "psychological intervention" should be mandatory.  In these severe cases, ostensibly productive members of the firm are causing harm to client relationships and firm personnel with long term costs that are hugely underestimated by their firms.  Perhaps offering such perks is a way to make it just a little easier to address these firm-threatening challenges.

Read the entire article...  perhaps your firm can offer many of the perks mentioned - most are not that expensive and I'll bet the return on investment would be healthy indeed (pun intended).

...you would have seen my Edge International colleague and friend, Robert Millard, present the findings from the latest Managing Partner Forum Survey related to differences in approach to strategy in firms in the United Kingdom vs North America, and also in CPA (Accounting) Firms vs Law Firms.  (Click on the sample slide to enlarge)

Download your own copy from Robert Millard’s Blog, Adventures in Strategy, post: Slides from Managing Partners' Forum meeting at White & Case LLP, New York on Thursday, 18 October 2007

Is the UK's wealthiest man also its wisest?  If you have about 1/2 hour to sit in on a fascinating conversation with Sir Richard, head over to Adventures in Strategy, my Edge colleague and friend, Robert Millard's blog post: Richard Branson on Life, Succeeding in Business and Everything
(Recorded March 2007 in Monterey, California. Duration: 30:44.)

I am very biased - Richard Branson is one of my heroes - nevertheless I will risk exclaiming that there is no Managing Partner who could experience this discussion and not be inspired.

Recipe for disaster: secrecy, unfair competition, deteriorating culture and even a partnership agreement that did not foresee that it was too generous to departing partners if more than a handful left at a time…

Joanna Pachner of Canada’s highly respected publication,  Financial Post Business, writes in detail today about how and why the highly respected and profitable Canadian law firm of Goodman & Carr met its demise.

Punchline:  If you are on the senior management team of your law firm, this may be a beacon of what to avoid in your own firm’s future.  And, integrity drives me to day this, based on my own experience working with law firms globally, many firms have some of these destructive elements already in place.  Perhaps the question is: when the tipping point is reached (that leads to a firm’s ultimate demise).  If you care about your own firm, read this article: Driven to [Self-] Destruction Financial Post Business, October 2, 2007.

Harvard Business Online has a coach named Marshall Goldsmith who has written or co-edited 22 books.  In answer to the question:

How Do I Provide Meaningful Recognition?

Marshall references the following:

1. List the names of the key groups of people that impact your life -- both at work and at home (customers, co-workers, friends, family members, etc.).
2. Write down the names of the people in each group.
3. Post your list in a place you can't miss seeing regularly.
4. Twice a week -- once on Wednesday, once on Friday -- review the list and ask yourself, “Did anyone on this list do something that I should recognize?”
5. If someone did, stop by to say "thank you," make a quick phone call, leave a voice mail, send an email, or jot down a note.
6. Don’t do anything that takes up too much time. This process needs to be time-efficient or you won’t stick with it.
7. If no one on the list did anything that you believe should be recognized, don’t say anything. You don’t want to be a hypocrite or a phony. No recognition is better than recognition that you don’t really mean.
8. Stick with the process. You won’t see much impact in a week – but you will see a huge difference in a year.

PUNCHLINE:  Many of the Managing Partners and Practice Group Leaders I serve do not have time for business publications (there are notable exceptions, of course).  Perhaps this introduction to Harvard Business Online will whet the appetite for and lead to requesting a free subscription.  The eight items above may not be perfect for your situation but I hope it stimulates your deciding the kind of recognition protocol you want to follow.

Read the entire Harvard Business Online post: How Do I Provide Meaningful Recognition?

The September 2007 McKinsey Quarterly has an interesting article called: The Evolving Role of the CMO by David Court who discusses four areas of change for the CMO:

• Changing to reflect new consumer [client?] buying behavior
• Shaping the Company's [Firm's?] public profile
• Managing Complexity
• Building new Marketing Capabilities

• Take time to understand what's really happening with customers [clients?]
• Foster the right connection between the CMO's efforts and those other parts of the organization
• Be a "thought partner" for the CMO as he or she transforms the marketing organization.

NOTE:  General access to McKinsey Quarterly is free but requires registration and log-in - for recommended article, premium (paid) subscription is required.

As most Managing Partners are aware, during 25 years as CEO of GE, Jack Welch added more value than any other CEO in history.  Accordingly, some folks think it worthwhile to analyze what Jack Welch did that fueled those exemplary results.

Much has been written about him and by him but now there us a book called:  What Made jack welch JACK WELCH: How Ordinary People Become Extraordinary Leaders by Stephen H. Baum and Dave Conti.  (I borrowed from this title in naming this post because I believe that Managing Partners might find this analysis helpful.)

Here is an excerpt from a blog post today on Management Craft, Discussions About State of the Art Management which highlights an article called Shaping Experiences by one of the book's authors, Stephen H. Baum. 

This excerpt from the article is what I believe may be a useful self-assessment checklist for managing partners:

"Archetypal shaping experiences contribute to the cake turning out well. The ten broad categories of shaping experiences are listed below and are shown with a brief definition and explanatory quotes from the leaders I interviewed for this book:

1. Swim in Water over Your Head. Take a calculated personal risk without specific knowledge of how to succeed.
"You gotta do things outside your comfort zone. On purpose."

"I figured I'd get beat up pretty good in this fistfight, but I had to do it. I got a big lump on my head, but I didn't die."

2. Make the Tough Choice. Choose group benefit over personal interest, or choose between two "rights."
"Sometimes you have to take a good friend off the team and make him feel okay about it. Or do it anyway."

3. Solve the Key Puzzle. Even if it is not your job, figure out the root of the problem or opportunity.

"Sometimes the crowd runs in circles. You have to concentrate and see what everything hangs on -- even if it is not your accountability."

4. Parent at Work. Help others to grow and to perform exceptionally.

"You learn a lot from your parents and by parenting your own children; sometimes thinking as Mom or Dad at work helps."

"Ask what you would do if your people were family -- you get some good approaches."

"Treat your employees as you would want your children treated."

5. Sell Something/Get Others to Buy In. Win hearts and minds to create followers.

"Sell an idea. You'll be doing it a lot."

"Get people to vote with their feet, part with their money -- it's what life is all about."

6. Connect with Others. Understand what motivates others -- walk the talk and speak their language. Enlist them as much by your deeds as by your words.

"This plane will get fixed a lot faster if the mechanics want it to. It won't fix itself."
"A lot of bosses treat their people like they're nobodies. My guys do their best because it's about us, not about me."

7. Build a Team. Gather and lead a group in a common endeavor, and succeed. Or fail at first and try again. Get average players to play like stars. Add new members and weed out underperformers. Set direction and change it while keeping the team together.

"When you have to deliver, you need experience in selecting people and getting them on the same page."

"Pickup football taught me how to handicap horses -- who will perform and who will not."

8. Get Good on Your Feet. Learn to communicate, dialogue, and project your authenticity in real time.

"I was the leader of the singing group. That is when I got used to speaking in front of others. It came in handy later."
"I ran for student council. That's when I learned to handle the hecklers."

"I wanted to create an atmosphere of fun around a serious proposition. I organized and led a parade in the building. It not only did what I wanted, it also got me noticed in a good way by the boss."

9. Develop Your Crap Detector. Practice your intuitive ability to read subtexts of conversations and to detect individuals whose words and behaviors are not what they pretend them to be.

"In the military police, we had to ask questions and make quick judgments about people -- a guy who seemed real nice might have beaten someone up a few minutes earlier."

10. Look in the Mirror. Assess your own values, beliefs, and behaviors critically.

"I didn't want to hear it, but the criticism made me look inside myself. I changed my career, headed for operations. "

"He made me see my passion -- it's why I stayed in this field against all odds."

"He told me I'd never make partner if I could not disagree without being disagreeable."

See the full blog post here or order the book here.

Incidentally, about Stephen Baum:

"Stephen H. Baum has been an adviser and coach to CEOs for more than twenty years, first as a partner with Booz Allen & Hamilton, the global consultancy -- where beyond the client work he was also on the appraisal and development committee and mentored young associates -- then as an independent practitioner."

The despised business of videoconferencing is about to get a new lease on life.

This weeks Economist has an article on Telepresence.  The full title is “Behold, telepresence - Far away yet strangely personal”.  (Requires subscription).  Image above is from the article.

Here are a few excerpts to whet your appetite for the story – the headings are mine:

The Problem:

Videoconferencing was supposed to put an end to corporate travel. But positioning people in front of a camera, fiddling endlessly with controls and then either giving up or proceeding to stare at a tiny picture of a blurry face often seems less satisfactory than the humble telephone.

The Solution:

Designers want people in telepresence meetings to appear life-sized, and the tables and rooms at the two ends to blend together seamlessly. (Rooms, furniture and even wallpaper are often identical, to aid the illusion.) People must also feel that they are making eye contact, which involves multiple cameras and enormous computing power. The delays in sight and sound must be negligible (ie, below 250 milliseconds, the threshold at which the human brain starts to notice), so that people can interrupt each other naturally. Sound must be perceived to come from the direction of the person speaking. And getting things started must be simple—ideally involving a single button or none at all.

Saving Money and Time (law firm example driven by client):

In addition to saving money, Cisco argues that telepresence saves time. The firm recently completed a takeover in eight days (as opposed to the usual weeks or months) by putting the lawyers in telepresence rooms instead of on aeroplanes.

More examples:

Lee Scott, the boss of Wal-Mart, the world's biggest retailer, is said to see great scope for improving his supply chain. DreamWorks, a Hollywood studio that helped HP develop its telepresence system, says the technology will help it make movies cheaper and faster, by allowing creative types to collaborate without travelling.

My Punchline:

Managing Partners – don’t think about this opportunity from the law firm’s perspective but rather your client’s.  You may have some clients who will acquire this technology and will want you to participate – I welcome this as I believe that most law firm technology comes because the clients want us to have it (sometimes, “insist”).   If top corporations in your markets populate your client list, perhaps you should become familiar enough with this technology to initiate the discussion with your major clients.  After all, wouldn’t it be refreshing for your client to believe of you that your firm is progressive enough to be at the forefront?

Footnote (Greetings from Uruguay):  Speaking of technology and the world becoming more virtual, I posted this blog entry from my hotel room in Montevideo, Uruguay following an assignment with an MDP (accounting and law) firm here.  The Economist arrived promptly on my desk top this morning and I was able to effortlessly post this story.  Perhaps before too long I will be able to conduct the kind of assignment I traveled here for by video conference.

About The Economist: You can of course buy the hard copy or subscribe on line. This story is marked: Aug 23rd 2007 | SAN FRANCISCO
 From The Economist print edition

“Ford & Harrison, a 190-attorney labor and employment firm, has tossed out billable-hour requirements for first-year associates. The program aims to close the practical-skills gap of law school education and increase value to clients. The firm also hopes it will enable associates to handle meatier matters more quickly.“ according to Leigh Jones of The National Law Journal.

I have the privilege of knowing C. Lash Harrison (pictured) and his remarkable stature within his firm.  When I read about this bold initiative I was in no way surprised that it was Lash who had the gravitas to pull this off.  It may be prophetic that the tag line on the Ford & Harrison firm’s website reads:  “THE RIGHT RESPONSE AT THE RIGHT TIME”

"Everyone sits around and complains about the problems," said C. Lash Harrison, managing partner of the law firm. "I figured, what the heck, maybe we can try something."

Observation:  The issue of newer lawyers recording time on files is a bit of a hornet’s nest in most firms.  If the time is billable, it detracts from the billing partner’s realization rate and perhaps even hours billed.   Carefully measured associates steer away from files where they can’t record billable time.  This creates a tension that is based on economic reality but serves neither the associate’s training objectives nor the client’s desire to optimize value.  Thank goodness for fresh thinking and bold initiatives.  That makes C. Lash Harrison a hero to me.

Thank you to LAW.COM for its post Firm Kills Billable Hour for First-Year Associates

"New Lawyer Jobs
90 percent of 2006 law school graduates found jobs by February, 2007. That's the largest percentage since 2000 and way up from the 85% rate ten years ago. Of the 36,465 graduates who have jobs, 56% were in private practice and 10% were judicial clerks. Of the remainder, 14% went into a business position, 11% took a position in government, and the remaining 9% where in other positions including academic, public interest and the military. Of the 3721 graduates without jobs, 889 are in a full-time advance degree program, 868 are studying for the bar full-time and 860 are not seeking employment. This leaves only 1,104 out of more than 40,000 graduates who are in the job market. (Source: The National Association of Legal Career Professionals)."

PUNCHLINE:  The optimism of law firms continues…  even though the July 2007 issue of Inside Counsel includes survey results revealing clients are far less optimistic about the growth in the demand for legal services.  Add to the mix the de-equitization of partners in many major firms as they strive for higher stock value (might they be anticipating Clemente). (Source: CareerJournal.com: More Law Firms Thin Ranks of Partners to Boost Profits)  How long can this last?  When it ends, will firms that have not seen a major downturn in decades be able to weather the storm?  I think many will not.

Thank you to Bob Lang of Legal Resource Group (Quietly Searching The Nation's Largest Law Firms) for the quote above from the latest LRG recruiting Trends newsletter July 9, 2007 edition.

*According to the largest-ever research program in the UK legal profession, it appears that as the Beatles sang “money can’t buy you love”

I am not certain that the numbers would be different elsewhere in the world but at least are informed by recent and credible statistics.

The Lawyer.com article: Twenty four per cent of lawyers want to quit said in part:

 "Although the City [London] has seen a series of hefty salary rises and increases in partner profits, the rise in earnings has not contributed to overall happiness."

I speculate that there are three reasons for the responses of the Managing Partners (whom I believe have one of the toughest jobs on the planet):

1)  they are frequently under-trained and undereducated in management;

2)  they lead people who too often have little desire to follow

3) they have tasted a life that is a departure from the grind of finding work, recording hours and billing clients and they seek an environment that will value their learned managerial and leadership skills. 

Your thoughts?

Check out the full article

Harsh?  If killing the golden goose is stupid, then this is not harsh at all. 

Find out why 58% of (surveyed) General Counsel expressed outrage.  Find out why 84% of (surveyed) General Counsel wanted the law firms they use to contact them about associate salaries but none did.

Brilliant law firm leaders who can not empathize with the clients they serve (including General Counsel in their larger clients) are going to pay an enormous price.

If sustaining profitability is high on your agenda, read Patrick Lamb’s post called “Demand Destruction” in his famous In Search of Client Service" blog.  (In a better world, there would have been no need for this post.)

Punchline:  Within the next two years, many private practice law firms will be going through some rough times and many will blame the GC’s of their clients.  There are two sides to this story.  Some bold firms should gather the courage to communicate with their clients directly and with candor.  The best texts on negotiating describe win/win scenarios where both sides benefit.  There is a certain immaturity to the ostrich approach most law firms take to these issues – even major firms.

The Wall Street Journal speaks - shall we listen?

“[William Durbin Jr.] regrets having focused too much on profits and “de-equitizing” partners (reducing their stake in the profit pool) in an effort to boost the bottom line, a strategy that has become popular in Big Law. ‘There’s a lot more that people bring to a law firm than profitability: integrity, a cheerful demeanor, teaching ability,” he said. “These intangibles have more importance than I paid to them.”

“Durbin says he’s written two letters to a partner he had demoted. “I said that ‘I’m sorry. I have regrets. You were always good to me and this should not have happened.’” The partner never wrote back.”

“The 51-year-old Dallas resident says he’s gotten out of corporate law and has undergone an “interior change” These days, Durbin says, he is studying Spanish with the goal of helping underprivileged Latino children.”

Punchline:  Law is a profession… a calling… it has (and deserves) dignity…  may we please place a filter under the coffee of profit to ensure that we deserve to survive as a profession – shall we deserve to survive or shall we deserve to die.  This is directed at lonely Managing Partners whose constituencies persist that it is all about the PPP.  Maybe there is something else!

Note:  I haven't mentioned the firm name - does it matter?  If it does, see (WSJ subscription required): The Rise and Fall of ...

(Click on image to see original enlarged version)

I was fascinated by this piece at the Consumerist:   How To Beat The Stock Market: Buy Companies With High Customer Satisfaction Scores

If the same phenomenon occurs in the legal profession, there would be a tremendous return on investment from enhancing client satisfaction.

The story is that a portfolio comprised of “companies at the top 20% of the the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI)... greatly outperformed the stock market, generating a 40% return.

“From 1996-2003, the portfolio outperformed the Dow Jones Industrial Average by 93%, the S&P 500 by 201%, and NASDAQ by 335%.”

How would you like to out perform the average law firm by somewhere between 93% and 335%?  More importantly, how much should you invest in order to reap a return of that nature?

Don’t bother disseminating this information to your people in order to encourage them to focus on enhancing client satisfaction.  Their consequential improved knowledge on the subject will do little.  It takes results (client satisfaction) to get results (improved profitability).  SKILLS rather than knowledge with be essential to achieve the desired outcome.

PUNCHLINE:  In my opinion, there is an overabundance of information in law firms and a dearth of client-relations training.  If you are a Managing Partner, you may want to balance this disparity.

Note:  I admit that this post is an act of unbridled extrapolation.  I cannot prove that the empirical research referenced would apply to the legal profession per se but my view is that it probably would.

(Thank you to my son, Daniel, for bringing this to my attention.  Daniel (Riskin) is a PhD and a renowned expert on bats - he discovered Vampire bats run - check out his site.)

How your people use their voice mail may seem at first both trivial and unimportant. BZZZZZZZZZZ WRONG!!!

The reason you open you wallet wide for a Ritz Carlton is because of the experience.  Do you think it’s a coincidence that you are greeted by name at the front desk?    (Did you see the secret service-type ear phone worn by the doorman who opened your car door and asked if you were checking-in and for your name?  As you walked form your car, the front desk staff was given your name – they did not not need to recognize you from last time.)

Two highly respected bloggers, Tom Collins of morepartnerincome and Patrick Lamb of In Search of Perfect Client Service respectfully disagree in their respective posts: Voice Mail -- a Lawyer's Friend or Foe and Voicemail--Useful Tool Or Devil's Folly?  Tom sets out some rules worth considering and Patrick builds on them adding his own perspective.

PUNCHLINE:  Take five minutes, read the posts, and then do the unthinkable.  Create your own protocol (that you think optimizes the client’s experience with your voice mail system) and then ask your partners, associates and staff to comply.  Trivial and unimportant?  Your competitors hope you think so.

I am not willing to bet against Cravath Swaine & Moore, are you?  In fact their strategic decision in creating an insolvency practice may be cause for additional respect rather than cheap shots.

The Wall Street Journal in a post called:  The Horror! The Horror! Cravath Starts a Bankruptcy Practice is quite hard on Cravath by referring to its new practice area as "declasse" and by asking whether " the ultimate white-shoe firm, has decided to scuff up its oxfords a bit".

But before deciding that the recruiting of former Skadden partner Richard Levin,  "one of the authors of the 1978 U.S. Bankruptcy Code" might be in some way negative, think about this. 

Perhaps the brilliant minds at Cravath have peered into their crystal ball and decided that $4.00 per gallon fuel, an expensive war, continuing low interest rates, a sliding dollar and a rapidly deteriorating housing market mean that many significant businesses are on a collision course with insolvency.

PUNCHLINE:  It will be interesting to see what the hindsight analysis on this event is two years from now when my speculation is that  Cravath Swaine & Moore and the word "ultimate" will be used in the same sentence without any reference to scuffing up its oxfords.

Thank you to Law.com and to Bruce MacEwen's Adam Smith Esquire for referencing our Edge International Most-Admired Law Firm Leaders

We have released a survey in which top law firm managing partners identify their most admired peers.

Over 60 law firm managing partners responded to the Edge survey, which asked them to identify which law firm leaders, from firms other than their own, they admired the most for their management and leadership competence. They were also asked what qualities made their selections admirable.

The survey concluded that Robert M. Dell, chairman and managing partner of the law firm Latham & Watkins LLP, is the most admired law firm leader, receiving 13% of the respondents’ total votes.

Regina M. Pisa, chair and managing partner of the law firm Goodwin Proctor LLP and Lee I. Miller, Firm joint chief executive officer of DLA Piper US LLP, tied for second place for respondent votes in the poll. Other firm leaders who rounded out the top ten most admired law firm leaders include: Ben F. Johnson III, of Alston & Bird LLP; Cesar L. Alvarez, of Greenberg Traurig, LLP; Bob Odle, of Hogan & Hartson LLP; Patrick McCartan of Jones Day; Ralph H. Baxter, Jr., of Orrick and Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP; T. Kennedy Helm III of Stites & Harbision, PLLC; and Keith W. Vaughan of Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice LLP.

It is notable that Odle and McCartan were selected by those surveyed, as both have retired from their respective firms.

When asked what leadership and management qualities made their selection admirable, the most common responses included: a willingness to make change, promote ambitious agendas, the ability to handle tough issues and get people within the firm aligned, and a commitment to maintaining the core values of the firm.

According to Patrick McKenna, my Edge International partner who initiated the survey: “One of the interesting developments was that we heard from another dozen or so firm leaders, who took the time to send us e-mails apologizing that ‘they were not familiar with other managing partners’ or ‘didn’t know enough to identify anyone specific.’ I guess our profession is not yet rife with numerous well-recognized management role models, but this survey shows that we’re evolving.”

"Buyouts alone accounted for 277 transactions worth $121billion in Asia last year" according to The Financial Express China is most popular destination for new law firms

Your thoughts?

According to The Wall Street Journal, "Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP, on Friday said that 45 partners have been asked to leave or accept other positions there as part of a restructuring".

According to thier own web site, Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP is among the largest law practices in the world, with more than 1,500 lawyers operating in 14 major cities worldwide including London, Frankfurt, Paris, Chicago, New York, Washington D.C. and Hong Kong.

Punchline:  I am not shocked that a law firm would cull its herd of partners but most do so discretely offering assistance to those affected to keep organic appearances.  This sudden and public move sends a message that is less than positive.  Why?

The story requires a subscription: Mayer Fires, Demotes 45 Partners

Does law firm success equal commitments + uncertainties + calibrated focus?  (I didn't say the formula would be simple.)

I hope top blogger Guy Kawasaki will not mind my using his entire question #7 from his post today featuring Michael Raynor, author of The Strategy Paradox.

Please take a moment to read it in its entirety and then look at my law firm questions below.  I think there may be a profound lesson here if we are willing to transpose. 

In order to be thinking “law firm”, substitute the words “Management Committee” for “Board”, “Managing Partner” for “CEO”, “Department Heads” for “Divisional or business unit vice-presidents “ and “Practice Group Leaders” for “Managers”.

Guy Kawasaki’s 7th question: What’s the proper role in strategy formation for each level in a hierarchy?

Michael Raynor’s answer: I’ve found that it helps to think about strategy in two halves: the commitments that all successful strategies entail, and the uncertainties attendant to those commitments. Commitments and uncertainties are only half the answer. The rest of the solution lies in calibrating the focus of each level of the hierarchy to the uncertainties it faces. It is common sense—if not common practice—that the more senior levels of a hierarchy should be focused on longer time horizons. What hasn’t been as widely recognized is that with longer time horizons come greater levels of uncertainty, and strategic uncertainty in particular. This fact has some profound implications for how each level in an organization should act.

• Board members should ask: What is the appropriate level of strategic risk for a firm to take? What resources should be devoted to mitigating risk? What sacrifices in performance are acceptable in exchange for lower strategic risk? This allows the board to be involved in strategy without getting involved in strategy making, which is correctly the purview of the senior management team.

• The CEO should ask: What strategic uncertainties does the company face? What strategic options are needed to cope with those uncertainties? In other words, it falls to the CEO, and the rest of the senior team, to find ways to create the strategic risk profile the board has mandated for the firm.

• Divisional or business unit vice-presidents should ask: What commitments should we make in order to achieve our performance targets? For these folks, it’s no longer about mitigating strategic risks, but making strategic commitments. Someone has to take the actions that create wealth, after all.

• Managers should ask: How can we best execute on the commitments that have been made in order to achieve our performance targets? To put it on a bumper sticker, they have to “show us the money.” There are no strategic choices to make at this level, because the time horizons are too short—six to twenty-four months. Strategies simply can’t change that fast.

Do the various levels of your law firm’s management think like Mike Raynor suggests?

Is your law firm strip-mined every year (every penny available is distributed to the partners less the investments that are made over the kicking and screaming of individual objectors)?  If so, is your firm deprived of the luxury of long term planning/investing (or even medium term)?

It has been predicted that China will dominate earth by 2050 because of its long term orientation.  A recent article in the New York Times, From 0 to 60 to World Domination, shows how Japan’s Toyota leads the automobile industry with its long term thinking.

PUNCHLINE:  So, I wonder if the extraordinary success of a few large firms is due to the fact that they have grown big enough to be business-like and the individual partners simply don’t have enough relative power to mess it up?  I wonder further if a courageous firm will emerge that will operate as Raynor suggests and with Toyota's winning long-term orientation.  Should that occur, a lot of today's law firms will have a lot to worry about.

Your thoughts?

Seth Godin explains this distinction simply with a post well worth reading: "The difference between strategy and tactics". 

Punchline:  My experience working with law firm leaders is that many are quickly seduced by discussions about tactics.  Perhaps they are more familiar with tactics than strategy or simply enjoy debating tactics.  The great firms have the discipline to do the right things well (rather than efficiently doing the camel-actions conceived by consensus).

Lovells has more than 1600 lawyers in 26 offices worldwide and according to RollOnFriday "the firm has signed a deal with Cass Business School and from next month, lawyers who've been at the firm for around two years will take a two year business foundation course in the evenings. Once this is completed, they'll spend three years studying three MBA electives. Some lawyers will then be sponsored to complete a full MBA"

Lovells joins several other major law firms in obtaining significant supplementary education for their lawyers either in house or by arrangement with a prestigious school.   While this behavior may not be commonplace, it is certainly a trend to watch.

Food for thought:  Ask yourself why a law firm would make this kind of investment.  I suspect it has to do with profession-wide declining client satisfaction scores and the number one concern of top clients that law firms simply don't understand their business.  You have to give credit to Lovells for this initiative – I hope it pays off for them and will therefore be emulated.

As a Managing Partner (or other member of the senior management of your firm), it is extremely important that you look beyond the incestuous offerings from inside the legal profession. Internal thinking sometimes has us gazing at our own navels.  If you want a glimpse of the outside world but in a way that is extremely time efficient, suggestica may be the answer.

Today at 8:00 AM PST, suggestica launched both the suggestics web site and the suggestica blog.

You can sign up for a newsletter at the web site and if you do not have an RSS aggregator you can sign up for an email alert at the blog.

Knowing the genius of the people who are behind this site, (including Rajesh Setty), I am optimistic that the "suggestions" from "suggestica" will be highly valuable to you as a thought leader in the legal profession.

You might start with Rajesh Setty's blog post called Paradox of Choice for Books which will link you to a fabulous free pdf download containing fascinating research by Barry Schwartz.

The other people you see referenced at suggestica will either be people you have heard of (like Oprah Winfrey) or people whom you should know, if you don't already (like New York Times Columnist and prolific author, Thomas L. Friedman).

Punchline:   Look outside our legal profession for catalysts for thought and the learnings that can be translated back into our profession for great benefit.  As a leader you want to keep it fresh and keep it powerful.

So, how many stars does your firm have?

Not sure?

You had better pay a visit to my friend and colleague Robert Millard at The Adventure of Strategy, and in particular, his post:  Banks Use Star Rating to Force Law Firms to Compete

My view:  The future does not care whether you like it or not

Seth Godin's blog post on Receptionists is 100% correct.  When I was a managing partner, my firm required a receptionist for our largest office.  I personally reviewed 215 applications myself and created my "A list", about 42 applicants, whom I invited for interviews late one afternoon.   I asked 6 of my partners to help me and we interviewed 6 applicants each.  Any WOW applicant was interviewed separately by at least two partners.  Were we insane to take so much partner time on this?  You decide.

PUNCHLINE:  For many years thereafter, we had a legendary receptionist whom clients loved on the phone and in person.  I personally received an average of two positive remarks about her every week.   Many of my partners and associates reported similar experiences.  She created the "positive experiences" that Seth blogged about.

I remember a call from New York one day and the lawyer started by saying: "before we get to the business at hand, I just have to tell you...".  I did not have heart to tell him "yeah, I know, you are the 100th person this year to tell me". 

By the way, I told that receptionist about every single positive comment I heard, personally or second hand (and no, that did not lead to extortion - she appreciated the recognition and the credible praise). 

Cynics - who are tempted to guess that she was the winner of a beauty pageant – don't go there –  she got the job as the best applicant and got her praise on merit - her performance was awesome.

Yesterday my wife, Bethany, and I visited the wisdom of Bruce Marcus (and his brilliant wife, Mana) at their lovely Connecticut home - those bricks you see behind us are the Marcus fireplace so I guess you could describe it as a "fireside chat".  (He is the author of no less than 15 books, including his fabulous Clients at the Core.)

I was privileged to listen to some of Bruce's latest ideas about the legal profession.  For example, he believes that our profession is reaching a "tipping point" – if you follow either The Marcus Letter or his blog, The Marcus Perspective,  (I recommend both), you will soon be reading about his latest provocative thoughts.

Some consultants focus on the very practical but Bruce is more demanding for us – he is a visionary who knows what is possible and therefore has little patience for excessive compromise.

If you are not familiar with Bruce's offerings, check him out – I think you will be richly rewarded.

"Law Seven" and conclusion from my article: "The Seven Immutable Laws of Change Management

7) Turn a spotlight on your initiative and leave it on

Many firms have fabulous meetings, sometimes in retreat venues where everyone participates in the creation of the master plan that will make the firm the “be all and end all”. All participants leave the process feeling a sense of pride and excitement that is palpable. It is only after the passage of a few months and the absence of any visible accomplishments that the disillusionment sets in. The cynics and skeptics have a field day — they might as well all buy red tee shirts with yellow words emblazoned across their chests “I told you so”. Well, Managing Partner, you must not allow this outcome. It is lethal and you cannot recover from it. Instead you need the lights that were on at the retreat to remain on. This is accomplished by not allowing the insects to crawl back under the rocks — (out of sight, out of mind). Instead you need to design processes that keep your people (not insects at all) in plain view. You can decide for yourself what might work best for you, but here are some of the techniques I have observed or recommended:

a) Monday Morning Memos (as referenced earlier) giving weekly status reports to showing everyone’s progress on the distinct steps (actions) that have been agreed upon. This creates healthy peer pressure and allows no-one to hide.

b) MBWA (Managing by Walking Around) coined by Tom Peters and Bob Waterman in their business classic In Search of Excellence — this means frequently dropping in, unannounced, to ask the right questions and to offer help — “How is that list coming… I see you are struggling to get this done in light of your particularly heavy case load at the moment… let’s explore some options… to whom could you delegate some aspects of this… I need you to make progress because others know you have an exceptionally heavy work load and if they see you getting your tasks done you will have effectively removed their excuses — I need you to do that… I will do anything to help short of doing your task for you…”

c) Convene follow up meetings that exchange “learnings” that individuals have gleaned from their respective tasks, for example, how they worked with difficult people internally or how they overcame client resistance. This should not be a meeting where everyone reports progress — progress meetings become meaningless exercises in seeing who can offer the most creative excuses for failing to deliver. This is a peer level training meeting where the objective is to become ever more effective at accomplishing quality non-billable tasks.

Conclusion: Fostering change in a law firm seems impossible because most Managing Partners treat the activities associated with such change as if they were component pieces of a legal transaction. Partners are so reliable when it comes to their substantive legal work that it seems unthinkable that they could not complete mundane simple tasks associated with management initiatives. Well, the real world is that the non-billable activities are not even on the same psychological map as the billable ones. Billable work means everything to a lawyer from income to professional satisfaction to garnering the respect of peers (internally and externally) to being respected in social circles. Non-billable work, no matter how important, and regardless of the value to our futures, will always take second place to billable work unless you, Managing Partner, manage for a different outcome. The score in many firms is billable work “100” and quality non-billable work “0”. By following these seven immutable laws of managing change, you will change the latter score from zero and even if you only to “99 to 1”, you and your firm will be the beneficiaries of the infinite improvement from “0” to “1”. Further, in the legal profession, those who make continuous slight progress win the race, because most competitors are still tied to that pier.

Law #1
Law #2
Law #3
Law #4
Law #5
Law #6

(…thanks to Cameron Cooper of the Australian Law Journal where my article first appeared)

"Law Six" from my article: "The Seven Immutable Laws of Change Management

6) Tell the world

Do you know why betrothed people say their vows in front of friends and family — to cement their commitment. It is the same reason a banker friend told me the bank does television commercials: “not just for our customers but for our own staff so that they can see the service promise we make to our customers and as a result they are more likely to live up to that promise”.

Tell the world what you are shooting for, whatever that may be – in fact, you can say it before it is so: “striving to be the firm of choice for the wholesale industry”. I am not advocating misleading or untrue advertising but I am saying it’s OK to declare what you are striving for. Your current and prospective clients will hold you accountable but that’s OK because it helps define the standard for your people and gives clarity to their target and therefore their everyday performance.

(Law 7 and conclusion)

Law #1
Law #2
Law #3
Law #4
Law #5

(…thanks to Cameron Cooper of the Australian Law Journal where my article first appeared)

"Law Five" from my article: "The Seven Immutable Laws of Change Management

5) Ask for commitment – not agreement

One of my most successful friends (and clients from my law practice days) has a One Sentence Journal and he posted the following wisdom one day:

"Commitment and Doubt": Commitment does not require the absence of doubt; often commitment means acting despite your doubt.
(From Larry Anderson's One Sentence Journal June 17 entry.) (Larry’s success is not only financial — it transcends to a long-term happy marriage and philanthropy.)

Think about it. You do not need your entire firm to agree with you and should not even ask for that. What you must demand, and accept nothing less than, is that your people commit to help you achieve your objectives even if they have doubts. At worst, someone who is not pivotal to the initiative may remain neutral and that means not sabotaging the effort in any way. But for that exception, those who offer passive or active interference must be confronted. If you don’t have the support to pull that off, step aside. You are allowed to lobby for that support but it must be forthcoming or else your resignation should be tendered. This is not hypothetical – this is how the well-managed firms are run. Choose your initiatives carefully because you must succeed in attempting them. They don’t all have to work but you have to be allowed to try them and give them the firm’s best efforts. If not, call the election.

(Law 6)

Law #1
Law #2
Law #3
Law #4

(…thanks to Cameron Cooper of the Australian Law Journal where my article first appeared)

"Law Four" from my article: "The Seven Immutable Laws of Change Management

4) Create cult-like internal promotional communications

This is where your capable support professionals can shine. They can help you create imaginative ways to keep the initiative in front of your people. The internal trainer in a major firm showed me high gloss promotional announcements that were sent internally to remind audiences about various internal workshops. I asked about the “commercial nature” of the alerts and he responded that “I have to break through the noise” to get their attention. He’s right, of course. It’s like paying attention to your spouse. If you take your spouse for granted, you may not end up alone but you will not reap the rewards that would have been yours had you been more attentive.

Some firms use Monday Morning Memos to catalogue progress on the action checklist, person by person. Others celebrate to congratulate for achievements (compete with cake and silly hats — perhaps tee shirts adorned by appropriate slogans).

(Law 5)

Law #1
Law #2
Law #3

(…thanks to Cameron Cooper of the Australian Law Journal where my article first appeared)

"Law Three" from my article: "The Seven Immutable Laws of Change Management

3) Paint “the first step” in vivid colours

"Take the first step, and your mind will mobilize all its forces to your aid. But the first essential is that you begin. Once the battle is started, all that is within and without you will come to your assistance." Robert Collier (1885-1950)

As leader, you are going to have to foster the taking of the first step by every individual whose participation is essential to your change initiative. This means that the first step must be crystal clear and painted by you in vivid colours so that no individual hesitates because of lack of clarity. The simplest way to do this is to facilitate a discussion that results in “to do” lists that include actual initial steps and time lines, and if necessary, methodologies. For example, the first step might be compiling a list of prospective clients in a particular industry that would have need of a particular service. The action may involve delegating internally (or even outside the firm) the task of creating the initial list and might include identifying precisely the parameters within the list, like numbers of employees, locations etc.

The punch line is to have a first step that is clear enough that you can ask if a specific thing has been done. For example, “is the initial list ready” is only a sensible question if it is clear that the first step was to create such a list and precisely what that list would be comprised of.

(Law 4)

Law #1
Law #2

(…thanks to Cameron Cooper of the Australian Law Journal where my article first appeared)

"Law Two" from my article: "The Seven Immutable Laws of Change Management

2) Create a vivid picture (vision) of where this initiative leads

It is tempting to be vague because then you are not committing to anything. Not committing avoids scrutiny and criticism. But without certainty, your troops cannot get excited about your change initiative.

Be specific: “If we dominate the provision of X legal services to the Y industry, we will not only increase our revenues in both the A and B practice groups by at least 25% in the next two years, but we can also expect increases in the C and D practice groups of at least 10% attributable to cross selling initiatives from the A and B practice groups”. Obviously the particulars are customized to the situation but the point here is to be specific. While quantifiable measures are essential to your firm’s success, qualitative ones may be equally motivating to your people. For example, many of your people will work hard for the prize of having more work of a preferred nature or to do more work for preferred clients.

You will rarely be exactly right when it comes to strategy and tactics — and that is OK. You will almost always do better or worse you’re your forecast. Get comfortable with being wrong because that is what management is all about. If you meet your objectives all the time, you are way too conservative. You will learn from your performance and continually correct and fine-tune. This is not the practice of law — it is the management of the business. In a real estate transaction, we expect to get good title for the purchaser on closing. This is not a guess or a hope or speculation. It is precise and we had better get it right — it’s what we’re being paid for. But a percentage increase in revenues from a particular kind of work is a crap shoot. No matter how smart you are, there are some variables beyond your control and many that are beyond your capacity to predict accurately. Worse, even if serendipitously your strategy is perfect, your tactics may be quite imperfect, at least initially. Business winners constantly monitor outcomes and frequently change or at least fine-tune tactics in an effort to continuously improve results.

The punch line here is to create a vivid quantitative and qualitative description of a desirable outcome that everyone in your organization can relate to, knowing and accepting that it is not perfect.

(Law 3 - Link to Law #1 if you missed it)

(…thanks to Cameron Cooper of the Australian Law Journal where my article first appeared)

"Law One" from my article: "The Seven Immutable Laws of Change Management (with thanks to Cameron Cooper of the Australian Law Journal where my article first appeared)

Managing Partners: Why is it that your intelligent (no, make that “super intelligent”) lawyers seem to react to your change initiatives like you were asking them to drink a tankard of poison, even when they know full well that the brilliant changes you are proposing would be beneficial to them individually and collectively? When we get Managing Partners from various firms together, many of them want to commiserate with each other about the impossible task they have in managing the unmanageable – I suppose my Edge International co-founder Patrick McKenna, and I did not cure that perception when we named one of our books Herding Cats. Some Managing Partners with whom I have had the pleasure of working are exceptions to that rule and what follows is what I think I have learned from them over these many years.

Here are the seven immutable laws of creating change in your firm. I guarantee that if you respect these rules, you will get the cooperation you need to effect the changes that will catapult your firm forward.

1) As Managing Partner, propose imperfect change initiatives

YES, I said IMPERFECT and when you saw that word a feeling of anxiety overcame you and you were tempted to react as a lawyer and not as a change-agent for your firm. Let me be clear. As a lawyer, your job is to do “the right things, perfectly”. That calls for unflawed effectiveness and efficiency. You probably hope your surgeon, if you ever need one, practices to the same standard. But face reality — as the manager of your firm, you do not have the luxury of doing only “the right things” because nobody, including you, knows what the “the right things” are except in hindsight — and hindsight is too late.

As a result, most good firms are paralyzed by the tedious, never-ending and totally ineffectual process of divining the perfect strategy accompanied by the perfect tactics. These firms are ships tied so firmly to the pier that no matter how well steered, they go absolutely nowhere. In fact, their biggest claim to fame is that they hit no icebergs — few ships do from the pier. Such firms may do “industry-average” well, but they are not going to consistently break out of the pack. Temporary successes come from individual initiatives that the firm is likely unaware of and therefore does not impede with excessive policies and standardization.

In strategy, you must make the best decisions you can with what you know and what you can speculate about. I am not against a little market research – in fact I advocate it but I am against the notion that you can know enough to comfortably make strategic decisions with the confidence that you are most certainly right.

Most good collegial firms make the mistake of trying to convince the whole firm (at least the partners) that a decision is “right” before proceeding. There is no collection of competent lawyers exceeding one in number that can or will agree to any single course of action mainly because their training is not to find the wisdom and potential in an idea but rather to reveal the concealed risks within it. No idea will ever be good enough so looking for unanimous approval is antithetical to creating change.

You as Managing Partner and your close team (executive committee, board if necessary) must make a decision. You must choose what you think your best option is from among the available alternatives.

The punch line here is “abandon perfection in favour of action”. Force the decision–making process within a reasonable time frame and then get moving. Release your ship from the peer. This will give you immediate competitive advantage. It will also contribute to the esprit de corps of your firm and that will literally add fuel to your change initiative. If you are going in the wrong direction, you can alter your course.

Please note that this is your initiative as Managing Partner — not your approval of the initiative of a support professional (like the marketing director in your firm). You can work together with such support professional side by side, you can even give them most of the credit if the initiative is successful but it must be your initiative, at least in part, or you have no hope of succeeding.

(Law 2)

"...a bridge to full partnership..."

My friend and Edge International colleague, Ed Wesemann, shares survey results via an article in today's Law.Com Large Law Firm Section, called Most Tier Partners Still 'On Path' to Equity Status, Survey Finds

He surveyed 58 managing partners of firms of more than 100 lawyers and found, at the median, five reasons for making lawyers tier partners. Find those five reasons and much more in the article.

For the tier partner, the pay and prestige are good, the pressure to bring in new business is less and there's still the prospect of full partnership down the road. "If you're being parked, you ain't dead yet," says Wesemann. "Wonderful things can happen to you."

Here's a part of what New York and Toronto Law Firm "Torys" says about itself:

Torys LLP is an international business law firm with more than 330 New York and Toronto lawyers. Our strength lies in working with clients on mergers and acquisitions, corporate finance, and major litigation matters. In addition, the firm’s expertise in a wide range of other practice areas enables us to focus on the needs of our business clients. Our New York and Toronto lawyers work together to offer a unique wealth of talent, experience and seamless cross-border service to clients on both sides of the U.S.-Canada border and around the world.

Visit Torys' Video Center and have a look at the three 3+ minute video casts.

PUNCHLINE: The subject matter is pretty esoteric - one question is whether anyone (besides me) watches these presentations. Of even greater interest is the fact that they are doing videocasting at all. Personally I can't resist the observation that whether anybody is watching or not, they at least look pretty savvy to their existing and prospective clients. Maybe your firm should consider following suit - you will still be early in the game.

CREDIT: See the Globe and Mail story "Torys tunes in to latest pop-tech craze" by BEPPI CROSARIOL from whom I learned about this.

When you fire a client, you might want to be a little more diplomatic than the title of this post (or the posture of the fellow above) implies — but, diplomatic or not, when it's the right thing to do, DO IT!

The primary purpose of marketing is to give you choices. Effective marketing allows you to improve your client mix and get rid of the ones who consume your life forces like voracious vampires — you know the ones, they don't pay (or pay VERY slowly), they argue, they test your ethics and they demoralize you and your best staff — and they don't wear watches, at least not when they call you at home at 11 o'clock at night.<