OK, so there weren’t any 17th century Managing Partners – nevertheless, two stories appeared today – yes, that’s the magic – SAME DAY! Story #1 BBC: _40121123_rumsfeldap203-1.jpgRumsfeld points to image problem (see full BBC story)

Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has told the BBC his country needs to do a “better job” at communicating its policies to the rest of the world.

Story #2 REUTERS: genImage.aspx.jpgRumsfeld defends Guantanamo, cites money invested (see full Reuters story)

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Tuesday defended the Guantanamo prison against critics who want it closed by saying U.S. taxpayers have a big financial stake in it and no other facility could replace it.

So, let’s think about this… image problem… it’s too expensive to dismantle a torture chamber… yes, I see the P.R. problem now. It’s all about cost… (PROTECT ME!!) DISCLAIMER: I am a Canadian citizen living in a British Crown Colony (Anguilla, B.W.I.) – US politics are none of my business, really, except as they might affect the world, in general… but I see a lesson for law firm managing partners here. Food For Thought: Rumsfeld is so detached from the public relations consequences of what escapes his pursed lips because he believes that the substance of his beliefs and efforts simply deserve to be appreciated. He’s like the doctor who is rude to her patients and just cannot understand why people go to lesser practitioners. The lesson here is an analogy to justice itself – it must not only be done… it must be seen to be done… I am addressing this to Managing Partners who should be constantly vigilent about the consequences of communications to the firms various audiences. (Don, if you are listening, you might want to reflect on this for a moment before George W. figures out that history may like him a tad better if he were to boot your rear end out of Washington. (Woops… I must write 100 times – “I am a Canadian… this is none of my business, sort of… I am a Canadian… this is none of my business, sort of… I am a Canadian… this is none of my business, sort of…”) genImage-2.aspx.jpgBy the way, do you think General Peter Pace, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, agrees with me, based on this photo (also in today’s Reuters story)?

10 Commandments for The Era of Participatory Public Relations

So, please tell me a law firm that these do not apply to (these are the handy work of Steve Rubel (Micro Persuasion) noticed referenced today on Tom Peter’s Newswire:

1) Thou shall listen – Utilize every avenue available to you to listen actively to what your publics have to say and feed it back to the right parties.

2) Remember that all creatures great and small are holy – It doesn’t matter if it’s the New York Times calling on you or an individual blogger, both have power. Take them all seriously.

3) Honor thy customer – Create programs that celebrate customers and they will celebrate you.

4) Thou shall not be fake – Keep it real; don’t hide behind characters and phony IDs.

5) Covet thy customers – Don’t sue your fans. You will alienate them.

6) Thou shall be open and engaging – Involve your customers in the PR process. Invite them to help you develop winning ideas and become your spokespeople.

7) Thou shall embrace blogging – It’s not a fad, it’s here to stay. Be part of it.

8) Thou shall banish corporate speak – People want to here from you in a human voice. Don’t hind behind corporate speak. It will soon sound like ye olde English.

9) Thou shall tell the truth – If you don’t tell the truth, it will come out anyway.

10) Thou shall thinketh in 360 degrees – Ask not what you can do for your customer, but also what your customer can do for you.

monica_bay_front.jpg Monica Bay (known as The Common Scold in the blogosphere) is a keynote speaker at the Raindance Conference produced by the LSSO (Legal Sales & Service Organization). On the LSSO website, at their Raindance Tab, if you click the words “Listen to Monica” you get a very brief interview with her, complete with her take on the philosophy she intended to espouse at the conference. What I want you to look at and think about is how cool this usage of technology is, thanks to Peter and Barbara Marx at Legal Insight. Check it out and let me know what you think.

PR Newsire (United Business Media) announced the top 20 Corporate Law Firms in America ranked by Directors and General Counsel:

The top 20 national corporate law firms for 2005, according to the
directors surveyed by Corporate Board Member (with their 2004 ranking in
parentheses), are:

1. Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom, New York (1)

2. Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz, New York (3)

3. Cravath Swaine & Moore, New York (2)

4. Sullivan & Cromwell, New York (4)

5. Jones Day, Cleveland (7)

6. Davis Polk & Wardwell, New York (5)

7. Baker & McKenzie, Chicago (6)

8. Kirkland & Ellis, Chicago (11)

9. Latham & Watkins, Los Angeles (10)

10. Shearman & Sterling, New York (13)

11. Weil Gotshal & Manges, New York (9)

12. Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, Los Angeles (8)

13. Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Palo Alto (18)

14. Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, Dallas (16)

15. Fulbright & Jaworski, Houston (12)

16. O’Melveny & Myers, Los Angeles (15)

17. Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy, New York (-)

18. Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr, Washington D.C. (-)

19. Sidley Austin Brown & Wood, Chicago (20)

20. Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, New York (17)

Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom topped the list for five straight years according to Corporate Board Member Magazine.

I believe this is the most important story in the legal profession in your lifetime, even if you are a centenarian. It redefines the debate as to whether law is a profession or a business. According to today’s Financial Times UK edition,

“One in 10 of the 100 biggest law firms have indicated they could seek a stock market flotation in the wake of planned rules allowing outside investment in the legal sector.”

And of those who are not contemplating a flotation:

“one in five expected their firms to seek outside investment”

“Two-thirds of the managing partners, in effect the law firms’ chief executives, said their firms were likely to admit professional managers to the partnership.”

Food for thought – Good News and Bad News:

The Good News: The notion of allowing non-lawyer partners would permit key support professionals like Executive Directors, Financial Officers, Marketing Directors, Training Directors, IT Managers, Knowledge Managers etc etc to have a stake in the business. I am OK with that – especially if it reduces the “us vs. them” attitude that is so prevalent between lawyers and non-lawyers in many firms.

More Good News: Investing in the firms future by enabling it to improve value to clients through training and infrastructure is a great idea.

Final Good News (sort of): A few wealthy people will get much wealthier in the initial deal (it’s called cashing out). Maybe they promise to stay around for a while for cosmetics and even shake a few hands now and then, but let’s not be coy, the desire of power partners to get a whopping return is what will drive these deals. Some not-so-senior partners will get some good cash too. (Where were those lake cottages for sale again?)

The Bad News: Selling a stake in the firm, whether to the market or an investor, is suicidal. This investment comes with a built-in poison pill. Here is the progression:

Step One: Senior partners cash out. (Note, Step One of Bad News is borrowed from Good News… as Leonard Cohen sang, “we are locked into our suffering and our pleasures are the seal”.)

Step Two: Everyone feels very excited – they will now be a part of something big and supposedly wonderful and corporate – perhaps the firm will even be managed now. There will be champagne and hats and lots and lots of publicity. (Clients will yawn).

Step Three: Reality sets in… these investors want WHAT? … a return on their investment… off the top? What are you talking about. Profits are for partners. Oh, and those things that we used to do because we thought it was fitting for members of the profession to “give back” are not going to get approved without a business case for how they generate new fee income? The grey area between business development and boondoggles will be grey no more. Fly economy, buster. We have standards of performance that are enforced and your friend in the corner office can no longer protect you (she already cashed out, remember?).

Step Four: “Hey, wait a minute”, say the young Turks, “why should we suffer in a firm where 20% of our profits, off the top no less, go to outside investors? Hmmmm, I could be generating the same income in a firm that does not have outside investors… hmmm, let’s consider this for a nanosecond. [The next sound you hear is the whirring revolving doors as the up-and-comers leave for greener pastures.] (Greener pastures are defined as firms who were not daft enough to get on this bandwagon in a moment of mind numbness.)

Step Five: The remaining productive career-oriented partners say “this isn’t working” and the investors are saying the same. We are losing talent, morale has plummeted, no-one listens to the turn-around CEO you brought in from industry… the future is far from bright if we stay on this path… “better liquidate”.

Step Six: The remaining partners make an offer to buy the firm back from the investors for 10 cents on the dollar (or 10 P on the Pound Sterling) and the episode fades into oblivion.

For those who are thinking: “this story is about the UK – not our jurisdiction” I will simply remind you that the largest firm in the world is based there—along with a number of other global legal powerhouses.

I would like to extend my congratulations to the 9 out of 10 biggest firms who are not contemplating a flotation and the four out of five who are not interested in private capital either. You are the wise ones – you don’t need capital that way – you can generate your own. After all, you are in a people business – you do not compete with Intel. If you did, you might need a few billion for a plant in Asia. All you need is to keep your wits about you as a few of our colleagues proceed lemming-like into the sea… I’ll see you at the Carlton Club and we can lament their tragedies over a cognac.

A HUGE thank you to Tom Peters for reviewing my upcoming book, The Successful Lawyer: Powerful Strategies for Transforming Your Practice and providing a commentary that will appear on the back cover. Candidly, my thank you was going to be strictly private but he generously mentioned my book in his June 9th post entitled Fall Reading Preview so I think it is quite appropriate that I express my gratitude here. Tom Peters has been one of my serious heroes since his first masterpiece, In Search of Excellence. His work inspired my partners and me as we built Edge International into a global consultancy. It is not uncommon for us to informally discuss his ideas at our internal meetings. I know many lawyers do not read business books, even a significant number of Managing Partners don’t, but to tempt you into exploring the mind of the person who likely has had more impact on business than any other thinker of our era, read this recent short bio on Tom Peters prepared for a leaders conference in London.

thb_peters.jpgTom Peters is the world’s leading management guru. His first book, In Search of Excellence, co-written with Bob Waterman, launched a management revolution and was ranked in a recent poll carried out by Bloomsbury Press as the “greatest business book of all time”. Since then, he has remained at the forefront of the movement to radically change organisations and how they are led in the face of new consumer, global and technological realities. His books, including his latest work, Re-imagine! Business Excellence in a Disruptive Age, have topped sales charts for over twenty years, with Peters becoming the best-selling business author of all time. Fortune calls him the Ur-guru (guru of gurus) of management, while the Economist tags him the Uber-guru. Business Week describes him as business’ “best friend and worst nightmare.” Tom, meanwhile, describes himself as “a prince of disorder, champion of bold failures, maestro of zest, professional loudmouth, corporate cheerleader, lover of markets and capitalist pig.”

Apologies to those in the legal profession who are also business graduates and cannot comprehend the possibility that there is any literate person who is not already familiar with Tom’s work. The sad truth is that far too many in the legal profession are not — to their detriment, in my view. While law is first a profession and second a business, in order for a larger firm to thrive it is going to have to maintain its stellar ethical base but then compete as a business with zest and imagination. Note the reference in his bio to the effect that “he has remained at the forefront of the movement to radically change organisations and how they are led in the face of new consumer, global and technological realities”. The major law firms (as well as the not-so-major) are facing the same challenges as business — after all, they serve business. I believe competitive advantage belongs to those who listen to Tom, think about what he is saying, and then creatively apply his ideas where appropriate and with courage. If you don’t have time to read all his books, check out his blog and wire service. By the way, I am delighted to see that the content from his book Re-Imagine! has been used to create four small-format books: Leadership, Talent, Design, and Trends. They’re called the Essentials Series. Trusting Tom’s marketing savvy, this will get the message to a lot more people (including, I suggest, those in the legal profession for whom the larger tome seems like too big a distraction from the “billable hour”). Thank you again, Tom — your taking the time means a great deal to me.

Dan Mitchell of The New York Times is referencing the blogosphere in his new column, What’s Online. If The New York Times is not the establishment, who is. Yes, they have had their hiccups along the way, but the blogosphere finding regular representation in The New York Times is HUGE not only because it gives an added layer of legitimacy to the blogosphere but because it will yet again “raise the game”. After all, it will be an informal honor for bloggers to be referenced there. (I suppose there is a possibility that questionable blogs might be ridiculed in Dan’s column, but I doubt that will be the thrust.)

What really impressed me was Dan’s willingness to be objective even to the point of airing a view that is hardly favorable to the establishment journalists of The New York Times itself:

A reporter for The New York Times, she writes, “is just a blogger who happened to attend college; impress some bosses with his or her talent; get some training through experience – and possibly (though certainly not always) journalism school; and receive a podium for his or her pains.”

The “she”, according to Dan, is Julie Hilden of findlaw.com.

For the lawyers and law firms I serve, this New York Times initiative further legitimizes and credentializes the notion of blogging (beyond some screwy thing a few weirdoes are doing that will soon fade into oblivion). I will continue to strongly encourage my clients to consider appropriate blogs, but now with enhanced credibility for the idea.

For you folks in Australia who will be attending the World Masters in August, I intend to include in my keynote some arguments and illustrations of how competitive advantage can be the reward for getting into the blogosphere while it is still an exciting medium.

(Full credit to Steve Rubel at Micro Persuasion for posting first on this and bringing it to my attention. If you are not already subscribed to his blog, you are in the minority. His blog is a beacon.)

At Edge International, we are very proud of our Innovaction Awards that we produce in concert with The College of Law Practice Management. Picture 2.png A HUGE thank you to Prism Legal Consulting for their reminder of the approaching deadline (June 14) Awards (by firm size) will be presented in four categories: Client Service Virtuosos Sponsored by ABA Law Practice Management Section Those evidencing the best innovation in client service or delivery. Market Disruptors Sponsored by Greenfield/Belser Ltd. Those who have displayed the best innovation in the creation of an entirely new revenue stream or market development. Knowledge Stars Sponsored by Baker Robbins & Company Those who have made the most innovative advances in skill-building or knowledge-sharing initiatives. Leader Ships Sponsored by Astin Tarlton Those who have taken the most innovative action toward improving their internal management or firm efficiency. If you have any questions about the awards, kindly contact my Edge International colleague, Patrick McKenna, by email or phone him at 780.428.1052. If you are curious, you can read about last year’s winners here. I understand that for many it’s too late for this year, so why not find out how to enter and get a headstart on next year.

Bashing lawyers is a popular pastime that I find as disgusting as any other form of bigotry. Almost all lawyers practice with courage and professionalism every day. So it is with pleasure that I pass on to you an account of the integrity and political bravery of a particular lawyer, and second US president, John Adams. johnadams.jpgMr. Adams added honor to the profession by taking on the most extremely unpopular trial of his time – defending British soldiers in the Boston Massacre in the Fall of 1770. Here is an excerpt from a brilliant piece under the title of “Law’s Heroes” at the web site of the University of Missouris Kansas City Law School:

It is striking that a man of such tremendous accomplishments would, in his later years, point to his representation of British soldiers in 1770 as perhaps the proudest achievement of his life. Adams wrote: “The Part I took in Defense of Captain Preston and the Soldiers, procured me Anxiety, and Obloquy enough. It was, however, one of the most gallant, generous, manly and disinterested Actions of my whole Life, and one of the best Pieces of Service I ever rendered my Country. Judgment of Death against those Soldiers would have been as foul a Stain upon this Country as the Executions of the Quakers or Witches, anciently. As the Evidence was, the Verdict of the Jury was exactly right.”

The verdict, in case you are curious:

After less than three hours deliberation, the jury acquitted six of the soldiers on all charges. Hugh Montgomery and Matthew Killroy–the only two soldiers clearly proven to have fired–were found guilty of manslaughter.

Thanks to Stephanie West Allen for sending me this. If you don’t know Stephanie, you will. A lawyer by profession, she developed and ran a stress-reduction program for lawyers, and then moved to Denver and worked for a number of years at a large Denver-based firm as their manager of professional development (training for the lawyers, evaluation of the associates, etc.). She was on Larry Smith’s Training Forum for his “Lawyer Hiring & Training Report” and was one of the original members of the Professional Development Consortium. Watch for a blog and a book from Stephanie in the not too distant future.