I am late to the game blogging on The New Republic article, The Last Days of Big Law.  To quote my friend Diane Hamlin:

Let’s not be like the lawyers. Let’s not attack the example.

I would caution us here to not dismiss the premise of the article, there is big change in the legal industry, by attacking the example.

Is Noam Scheiber‘s article perfect? No.

Does he make some great points that we should be discussing? Absolutely.

But why are we wasting time arguing over whether the glass is half-full or half-empty when there is a hole in the cup?

Continue Reading Let’s not be like the lawyers (Let’s not attack the example)

You like me. You really, really like me!

Oh, fine, I’ll play the “please nominate and vote for me” game.

The ABA Journal is working on their annual Blawgs 100 list.

Well, faithful readers, followers, friends and my mom, I’d appreciate it if you’d take a few moments and nominate The Legal Watercooler for inclusion in this year’s compilation.

It’s super easy. Just visit the Blawg 100 Amici nomination page and fill in a couple boxes. Due date is August 9.

Not so humbly yours, Heather

referee-2Hear those doors slamming and heads banging from your legal marketer’s direction? It can mean many different things, but between now and the end of the year, it’s most likely your Chambers & Partners submissions are due. Lucky for me, I work for a boutique and we keep our submissions manageable and simple. But I’ve worked in an AmLaw 100 where we did everything for every one across multiple states, time zones and continents. We had to manage what felt like a non-stop deluge of submissions across states and practice groups. John Hellerman at Hellerman Baretz just posted Clients: The Secret to Your (Chambers) Success:

The research cycle for Chambers USA kicked off on Monday, which means submission season is well and truly underway.  It also means, no doubt, that lots of you are panicking.  You may be wondering whether you’re ready, and if not, where you should be focusing your energy.  The answer is very simple, and involves two words: client referees.

For those of us on this side of the pond, referees are your references. While you might think that having the GC at your favorite Fortune 500 is the best reference due to name recognition and panache, the guy or gal a few notches down on the totem pole is most likely the better choice due to their accessibility, knowledge of the actual work you and the firm are doing, and willingness (and time) to return the call. A few little secrets I’ve learned over the years:

  • Chambers will only call a reference once every 6 months to a year. So if they spoke to your reference in June, they will not speak to her again in September.
  • Chambers will not tell you who is on the do-not-call list.
  • Chambers will not confirm with you which of your references they have contacted.
  • Chamber WILL tell you how many of your references they have reached.

So, if your “interview” period is in August, you might want to give a call mid-month to see how many of your references have been called. If only two out of the ten have been contacted, you need to get your partners on the phone. Who did they reach? Who did they miss? Who is out of town? Who can you substitute in? Great work is great work. But Chambers wants to hear about it from your references.

Kudos to the Legal Marketing Association – Los Angeles Chapter program team on today’s Corporate Counsel Panel. I have to say, I always love me a GC panel. Sure we hear the same ol’ same ol’, but there are always a few new nuggets of information in there.

GC panel
Corporate Counsel Panel
Three things popped out at me:

  1. The importance of LinkedIn. I have never at a panel heard GC after GC rave about LinkedIn. Okay. Four out of six. But they were vocal in their enthusiasm. The connections.The groups. They are using it to vet outside counsel. Learn information. Stay informed of trends. I’ve hyper-linked the LinkedIn profiles below where found.
  2. ACC Daily Newsletter. For those who don’t know what this is, the Association of Corporate Counsel uses Lexology to feed a daily newsletter for ACC members. The members can customize it by industry, practice, region, etc. Where does Lexology get the content? Law firm blogs. Corporate counsel are reading with their eyes and clicking on things that are of importance.
  3. Headlines Count. Whether it’s coming from an e-newsletter, scrolling through a LinkedIn group’s latest postings, or the Lexology daily newsletter, corporate counsel are clicking on the headlines that resonate with them on the issues they are facing today. Harkening back to this post, Why, yes, Amy. I did learn two new things, it’s not WHAT they are about to read, but WHY they need to read it that counts.

I tweeted at #lmamkt some other little tidbits. But those are the biggies that I walked away with, Oh, Yeah. One more: 4. It’s all about relationships. Don’t ever forget that. In Photo: L-R. Deborah Greaves, Secretary & General Counsel, True Religion Brand Jeans; Camilla M. Eng, General Counsel, JM Eagle; Joanne E. Caruso, Vice President, Global Litigation, Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.; Jennifer Fisher, Senior Counsel, Intellectual Property, The Boeing Company, Boeing; Sheri Eisner, Associate General Counsel, JAMS; Tammy Brandt, Vice President and General Counsel, ServiceMesh, Inc.

I read in today’s National Law Journal that California might, gasp, require lawyers to have practical skills training before they are licensed.

A task force of the State Bar of California has recommended that new attorneys be required to complete at least 15 hours of practical skills training and 50 hours of pro bono service before they are admitted to practice.

If adopted, California would be the first state to mandate real-world training in law schools and the second to require pro bono work of new attorneys. New York was the first state to require pro bono work and a judicial committee in New Jersey has recommended the move.

What is sad is that while a long time coming, what good will it be if we don’t continue to require such skills training once these associates join law firms or hang up their shingle?

Think about it. When the current rainmakers and managing partners were in law school there was no Internet to the degree there is now. No Blackberries. No iPhones. No social media.

There was no such thing as e-discovery. Scanning. Electronic filings.

“Real-world training” is not something you learn once and then you have it.

When I was working at a certain Am-Law 50 firm I put in to attend the Legal Marketing Association‘s annual conference. It was declined because budgets, bla bla, not fair that I go every year. I spoke with the firm-wide managing partner, who supervised our department:

So, this is it. I am as good as you will ever need me? I don’t need any new skills? I don’t need any new knowledge? You don’t need any more out of me than I am giving you?”

Her reply was “Have a great time at the conference.”

“Real-world” training HAS to be continuous. And there is only so much we can do without the support of our firms.

Unfortunately, in the “real-world” legal environment we motivate lawyers by money and hourly requirements.

If the bar associations want to make a real change and investment into the lives and success of our associates (who, by the way, are our future rainmakers and managing partners), then they need to start allowing marketing, business development, technology, and business trainings to be eligible for CLE credits.

They currently require ethics and substance abuse/addictive disorders credits, why not the “business of law” credits?

Until then, these “non-billable” “activities,” that can make or break a law firm’s business model and operations, will continuously be sent to the back burner, or ignored all together.

When you look at the latest AmLaw 100 rankings, you are looking at multi-million and multi-billion dollar a year GLOBAL operations. Yet they are loathe to turn the business operations over to “non-lawyers,” and God-forbid you actually pay them a salary that in on par with what the partners are making.

While I applaud the California Bar Association for taking this baby step, a leap is what we really need.

After PartySpoke on a panel yesterday with Adrian Lurssen and Molly Potter on content marketing. Adrian Dayton was the ring-leader. Lots of good folks in the room. Adrian D. kicked things off with a giant piece of paper on each table asking us to write down what we hoped to get out of the program. From our table Amy Knapp threw out: “I want to learn two new things.” As we were all presenting from our table, our knowledge base was different than the rest of the room, and I wondered if I would actually learn two new things. However, I always say that I define a program as successful if I can walk away with one new ACTIONABLE idea. I came away with three new things:

  1. Google Authorship. Seriously. What rock have I been sleeping under? Kevin O’Keefe wrote about it way back in March here. Time to play catch up.
  2. Clicky: Web Analytics in Real Time. I originally hosted The Legal Watercooler on Blogger and got great analytics, including the name servers visiting my site. When I switch over to WordPress a few years ago, I lost that feature in my analytics. Amy shared about Clicky and before I left the room yesterday I had added it to my blog. So watch out. I can see you again.
  3. Adrian L. simplified a concept into one sentence that resonated with me, and something I am sharing with the lawyers at my firm who blog: Blog titles should tell the reader WHY they should open up and read the post, not WHAT they are going to read. It’s not that I didn’t know this. I just needed to hear it this way.

So, all in all, very successful program.

A colleague posted a link to Teenagers: Why You Should Care About Your Digital Footprint that I shared with my teen who just got her Facebook account, and the parents of other teens.

It’s good reading, and a good reminder, for us all.

The main lessons:

  • Information travels fast and is often taken out of context
  • Don’t be impulsive
  • If you wouldn’t say it face to face, don’t say it in the social space
  • Not everything is personal
  • You are not as anonymous as you think
  • Your online actions could make or break you
  • Stop Before You Hit Submit
  • Further:
    • Who will see it?
    • What can they do with it?
    • Could this impact me in the future?
    • Why do I want or need to share it?

As Adam Levine is learning today, something said in passing can also be posted to social media, and take on a life of its own. I know Adam doesn’t hate America. But, wow, talk about a quip heard round the world.

On a smaller scale, it is the comment or picture that gets picked up and spread around the school.

Or the office.

Or the industry.

Teens and celebrities are not the only ones who hit that send or publish button too quickly. Or have something they said picked up and distributed out of context. That’s nothing new. Been happening since Outlook took over our e-mail servers in offices.

However, that was also before Above the Law started republishing, and then promoting,  e-mail scandals on its website. Before Twitter and Instagram and Facebook could reach thousands within a span of moments.

Remember the CFO of that company that got fired when he posted his YouTube rant. Just Google that phrase and you have page after page written about him. That will never, ever, ever go away. Bet he regrets that now.

  • So, remember your grandma, or your mom before hitting that send button.
  • Always assume anything you say or type is being recorded and could be shared.
  • There really is no such thing as privacy, and, as Ben Franklin said, “Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead.”
  • You cannot hit delete, or recall that e-mail, fast enough. There will be a permanent record.

Knowing the nice Jewish boy that he is, I’m sure there’s an great-uncle, aunt or bubbe reprimanding Adam’s parents right now.

Trust me. I know. The last thing anyone wants is to the be the focus of the family’s gossip on Rosh Hashanah or Passover. Or the ridicule of the school yard. Or the gossip at the next industry event. Or be the lead story on Above the Law.

It is no secret that I’m very interested in how teams work, how individuals (ME) fit into a team, and how we all come together to get the job done.

A colleague of mine posted an interesting job description for a Director of Law Firm Marketing and Public Relations:

  • “Intense Measurement” is your mantra. You prescribe to the theory that water boils at 212⁰F. Not at 210⁰ or 211⁰. It has to be 212⁰F. Even if you have 99.5% of the heat you need – your water is at 210⁰F – it won’t boil. Yet if you just tweak one or two small things – move the pot slightly to the right or increase the fuel a hair – suddenly everything changes. The water starts to boil. The same applies to the Marketing and Public Relations Director’s job – you can put lots of effort into it, but nothing “boils” until you look for those missing, magical “degrees” that could change everything. Whether you need to place more “streaming ads” on sports radio stations on Mondays, you need a direct response campaign during the heaviest tax return weeks, or you’re convinced we need a same-sex only divorce site (one in five couples meet online, but three-in-five gay couples meet online)…you never give up and the “perpetual beta” is something that you focus on day-in and day-out;
  • You’re a quick study with strong people skills…you have the ability to read people quickly (and accurately)…you are approachable, inspire candor and welcome multiple points of view;
  • Basic marketing research skills: you know how to collect information, analyze research and develop reports explaining their findings. You use calculations and formulas to evaluate data as you attempt to forecast future trends, and use information you find to support these claims;
  • You have a love and knack for writing, you “rock” in social media marketing, and you can write original copy based on your solid understanding of our primary areas;
  • You are proficient in Microsoft Office and Acrobat, and you know the basics of Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign, and
  • You can juggle multiple priorities simultaneously, establish clear priorities, meet deadlines and remain laser focused on the goal in a never-ending environment of change.

I love it.

I would hope that the resumes coming in will be include a wider pool of folks who will be the right fit, but perhaps not have the spot-on skill set that you would get from a functionally focused job description.

Some of these skills can easily be learned, especially if you have an inquisitive personality, and enjoy learning new things. But you cannot teach someone to be inquisitive or have a desire to learn.

Reminds me of some interview questions I’ve been asked over the years: “How can you market us in New York when you live in Los Angeles?” “Can you tell us about your experience marketing lawyers within the ABC industry?” “Who are your PR contacts in XYZ community/industry?”

Really? Why not ask me what I’m going to do in my first 90 days?

I don’t need to live in Santa Barbara, or Silicon Valley, or Denver to understand how to build up and learn about those markets, manage resources, and identify opportunities. Yet I have successfully taken on responsibilities in all of those markets, and work with lawyers to expand their practices in each community.

I knew very little about the insurance industry when I took on my current job. Probably why I subscribed to every insurance industry/business publication I could find during that first week.

We recently held a very successful industry conference for one of our practice groups. I didn’t sit in the sessions as my head was focused on all the logistics and I wouldn’t have heard a thing.

One of the lawyerly types said I would probably be bored learning about the minutia of what they do.

Actually, I do need to know what the lawyers do, and how the clients operate, but on a just below the surface level.

As I told one of my partners: I need to know enough about what you do to identify opportunities and help you market your practice.

But the real answer goes a bit deeper then that:

  • I need to understand the marketplace where the attorney operates. I need a clear understanding of who their buyer and influencers are.
  • I need to know the legal resources used, and where to find the answers to questions I might have.
  • I need to know the legal terms, and the major laws and legislation surrounding the industry. Where are the hurdles and brick walls that clients come up against?
  • I need to understand the business lines of the clients involved, and how they are currently operating in the marketplace. I need to have a clear understanding of the business needs and concerns of the client.
  • I don’t need to know enough to do the lawyer’s job.
  • I don’t need to run the client’s business.
  • I need to be able to connect the dots between the client’s business problems and our attorneys’ legal solutions.
  • And I really need to understand how my firm and our attorneys differentiate from our competitors.

So lacking specific industry, marketplace or functional experience should not be a game-stopper for interviewing or hiring an individual for a specific job. For those involved in the hiring process I would want to know:

  • How does she fit in the existing teams within the firm, practices, departments?
  • What are the qualities of his personality that will move projects along and get the job done?
  • Does she have the thirst for knowledge and inquisitive nature to seamlessly take over an existing position, or create a new one?
  • Can he fit in and manage the attorney personalities within our firm and culture?

Back to the questions at hand: Should you be hiring for fit or function. I’ll go with the Pareto principle on this one. 80% fit and 20% function.

I was out of the office sick on Friday (yes, I was legitimately sick, on a Friday before a 3-day weekend, thank you very much), and am slowly going through my 100+ emails.

The amount of spam is out of control. Usually I just “block” the sender and move on.

But I am noticing a new trend in here.

It’s the personal requests, that are turning into guilt, that turn into anger messages painting me as rude for not responding.

Some of these requests are so bold that they are now attaching meeting requests to drop onto my Outlook calendar.

Look, I didn’t ask you to email me. I didn’t ask for information about your product or service. And, frankly, if I responded to the emails, I think a tribble cascade would begin, so I delete. I mark as spam. I move on.

I just know if I were to reply “no thanks,” they will take that as a permission to start emailing me more. Or, worse yet, calling me and leaving messages.

So here’s my dilemma.

Sometimes I actually know these companies so I can’t block them.

Some of them are well-known service and product vendors in my industry. It might even be a product I am interested in for down the road, but I can’t let on, or the tribble cascade beings and the next thing you know it is out of hand.

I don’t think the onus should be on me to have to return an unsolicited call or email. If I don’t reply, can’t you take that as a “she’s not interested” and move on?

And don’t make me feel bad for not giving you 15 minutes of my time. Because it will never be 15 minutes. You and I both know it.

I’m not looking for an answer here. I’m just venting and justifying my deleting and blocking so many emails today.