1134739595810.jpg Managing Partners — start thinking of ways to harness this little philosophical gem in your firm:

Fun is not a distraction from work or a drain on our revenue; it is the very source of both our inspiration and our value. A genuine sense of play ignites our creativity, eases communication, promotes goodwill and engenders loyalty, yet we tend to shun it as detrimental to the seriousness with which we think we need to approach our businesses and careers.

Extracted from a wonderful recent post in influxinsights – I encourage you to read it in its entirety.

aerospace.jpg Follow me on a journey of logic — skip a decade to 2015 when air travel may dramatically increase in speed to 30,000 km per hour or 18,000 miles per hour — imagine a trip from Moscow to New York in 50 minutes or Moscow to Sydney in one hour and six minutes. (See reference to news story at end of post) I contend that as the world continues to shrink, we will see a breed of global super lawyers who will go almost anywhere where there is a lucrative opportunity to bring unique skill and knowledge to bear on a legal problem. What will this mean for competition — especially for the global firms. One might argue that they will be best positioned to exploit the opportunity because they can move their specialists around the globe more easily. However, it may also represent a threat to the global firms because agile competitors will be able to send top guns in without having to establish expensive local offices. A third possibility (my favorite) is that we will see even greater industry specialization such that any member of that industry will hire a known dream-team law firm the bricks and mortar location of which will be irrelevant. I propose this as a serious planning issue, if not immediately, at least in the not too distant future. Competitive advantage comes from thinking ahead of the curve — not behind it. Fasten your seatbelts! (Story: Spaceflight from Moscow to New York to take less than an hour)

AdamSmithHardWorkingBanner868x150.jpg Bruce MacEwen (of Adam Smith Esq. fame) has one of the most valuable blogs on the blogosphere if we measure that objectively based on its (richly deserved) popularity Bruce shines a light on the looming New York Subway strike in his post: Limits to Capitalism: The New York City Subways and When Public Benefits Private Take a look — you’ll enjoy both his insights and some interesting trivia about the New York subway system.

Tom Kane.jpg Tom Kane See Tom’s post by this title — these tips are so true (and I base that assertion on a lot of work with both GC’s and those who pitch to them). PUNCHLINE: Busy lawyers frequently look for the magic bullet – the tricks that the great rainmakers use. The simplicity of the list in Tom’s post should not fool you. If you find yourself arguing with the list, you are suffering from what Zig Ziglar calls “hardening of the attitudes” — a deadly disease for aspiring business developers.

cal2006.gif Thank you Tom Peters for this tidbit from a post called “Stuff…”: Peters_TomWEB150X200.jpg

ALL THERE IS. Damn it! I keep forgetting this! Leaving it out of presentations! Namely, a PP slide that simply reads : You = Your Calendar. THIS IS MY #1 BELIEF ABOUT MANAGEMENT. Or: “You can’t bullshit your calendar.” Or: “Your calendar knows … do you?” All we have is our time. The way we distribute it is our “strategic plan,” our “vision,” our “values.” Period. So how’d you spend your precious time today? Tell me, and I’ll tell you what you actually care about—it’s simple and unerring.

FASTFORWARD: I have an expression I use when talking for senior power partners in client firms: “Your behaviour is so loud, I can’t hear what you’re saying”. This is usually in the context of seniors lecturing juniors about perfection but the juniors have their eyes fixed firmly not on what the seniors are “saying” but what they are “doing” Tom Peters has this so right — a reminder to every single one of us to make sure that our 2006 calendars consist of the behaviours that are in harmony with what we aspire to (otherwise we are engaging is self deception). Thanks for the reminder, Tom

sizeD50_hFliped-1.jpg David Maister pat-01 crop.jpg Patrick McEvoy Patrick McEvoy interviewed David Maister for 30 minutes on his new article “Do You Really Want Relationships” which I posted about in “Do you want romance or a one night stand?” If you would care to hear it, you will be asked for your name and email address and then sent directly to the audio (no registration required).

Since Alvin Toffler’s Future Shock and Third Wave we have been expecting accelerating change and while I comprehend it intellectually, change usually seems to be gradual — it just sort of creeps up on you.

Well, according to this National Public Radio story, here’s a change you will notice.

If you are designing new offices, two restrooms, one for each gender, just may not be enough anymore.

Morning Edition, December 15, 2005 * The city council of Nova Iguacu, Brazil, has passed a bill requiring night clubs, movie theaters, malls and other public places to provide a third bathroom for transvestites. The mayor has yet to sign it. But the council says having only two options — men’s and women’s — is a big problem in a town with 28,000 transvestites. (Well, it is just outside Rio.)

I am not trying to be cheesy here, but let me ask you… did you see that one coming?

The additional irony here is that the story is about law — after all, that is what is being debated — a law forcing requiring three bathrooms in public places (albeit only in Nova Iguacu, for now).

For this one visible and rather remarkable change, there are thousands of more subtle ones from text messaging to internet in the friendly skies.

So, when you are planning, do not fall into the trap of simply doing a linear extrapolation from the present – or you may get caught with your pants down — or should I say panties — maybe even in the wrong restroom.

Thank you to Tom Peters Wire Service for the story

images-17.jpg You will see the story gets all excited about Benjamin R. Civiletti, now chairman of the Venable law firm, for reaching the lofty threshhold of a $1,000 per hour hourly billing rate. If that $1,000 rate for Mr. Civiletti is serving a well conceived strategy to differentiate by being obnoxiously expensive, I fully respect that. If not, publishing high hourly rates clearly causes more harm than good. Don’t get me wrong, Mr. Civiletti appears to be an extraordinary lawyer (reference his bio) Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz is ignored until the the very last paragraph of a story from Bloomberg News today that appears in the Vancouver Sun in Vancouver Canada of all places, titled “U.S. lawyer charging $1,000 an hour“. $3.5 Million per partner for Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz demonstrates just how ludicrous it is to look at hourly rates as a measure of profitability. Hourly rates do not tell the client (or the law firm) what the matter is going to cost. When I began the practice of law in 1973, my 100 year old firm’s managing partner had a terrific formula for determining an hourly rate: “tell me how much the lawyer billed and the number of hours recorded last year and I’ll tell you that lawyer’s hourly rate.” Today we would define that as the effective rate, of course. So what is a Wachtell partner’s effective hourly rate? You guess the average number of hours worked by Wachtell partners and I will tell you the rate. Notice, I didn’t even say recorded, I said worked. If you speculate that Wachtell partners are maniacs who work an average of 3,000 hours a year they still beat the highest published hourly rate in the USA. What if they actually work a civilized 2000 hours? That would make their realized rate (not billing rate) $1,750 per hour. That includes their weakest and laziest (or distracted) performers. Don’t go arguing that Wachtell’s profits are the result of leverage – their web site confirms (look in “the firm”):

We operate with a ratio of partners to associates of one to one, and matters undertaken by this firm are afforded the direct personal attention of partners having expertise and sophistication with respect to the issues.

Conclusion #1: Hourly rates are a stupid way to price work for clients in the first place and an even dumber way to compare lawyers. The really smart ones have figured this out and are profiting hugely by their discovery. Conclusion #2: Don’t be impressed by hourly rates alone – they are only part of the story — the obnoxious part (at least from the client’s perspective).

209-300x300.jpg Robert Millard My Edge International colleague in Johannesburg, Robert Millard, passed this along internally – I immediately sought his permission to share it with you.

You are driving down the road in your car on a wild, stormy night, when you pass by a bus stop and you see three people waiting for the bus: 1. An old lady who looks as if she is about to die. 2. An old friend who once saved your life. 3. The perfect partner you have been dreaming about. Which one would you choose to offer a ride to, knowing that there could only be one passenger in your car? Think carefully before you continue reading…………………… You could pick up the old lady, because she is going to die, and thus you should save her first. Or you could take the old friend because he once saved your life, and this would be the perfect chance to pay him back. However, you may never be able to find your perfect mate again. The “out of the box” answer? Give the car keys to your old friend and let him take the lady to the hospital. Then stay behind and wait for the bus with the partner of your dreams. Sometimes, we gain more if we are able to give up our stubborn thought limitations.

FASTFORWARD: What options are we not seeing that would accelerate our firms toward our vision of an ideal future? images-16.jpg Edward De Bono FOOTNOTE: Edward De Bono is #20 on this year’s list of the top 50 business thinkers. His books can be found at Amazon – if you are not already familiar with him, treat yourself to his book, Lateral Thinking – but warning, if you get addicted, you’ll be consuming all his treasures (and perhaps choosing better strategies at the bus stops of your professional life).