« Real lawyers practice law. Blogging comes second | Main | Distinguish yourself. Surprise clients. »
April 22, 2009
We, The Undisciplined, The Miserable.
For a long time I've thought that American business schools and the training programs of global and often publicly-traded companies do a much, much better job than do law firms of training recruits to value and adhere to the structure of a plan on an item for action.
Do we lawyers know how to get things done, done right and done on time? Do we even value that? I wonder.
I am not talking here about the simple "keeping face" and survival requirements of meeting client deal or court deadlines, or even about the cliches of working hard, creative thinking, "out of the box", working smart or being persistent. I mean structure, a real standard, and "practicing structure" every day--the discipline of (1) having a plan or strategy for any one project, client or non-client, (2) meeting internal project deadlines no matter what, and (3) applying the will to work that plan and timetable.
And making it a habit until it's natural--and fun.
"Structure" is not just the hard process of getting things done. It's a frame of mind and a value which must be sold to others in your shop--like the importance of making that 5 minute call to a client about a loose end at the end of the worst day you can remember, even while you could do it the next morning at 8:00. It's realizing that letting anything but emergency tasks "slide" makes you inefficient, unlikely to meet your real goals, and tired.
"What ever is he talking about?"
Do you get up early every day with a idea of what needs to be done on each project, and knowing the difference between "important" and "urgent"? Example: Monday is your deadline to have the final changes and notes to your web designer on your new firm website, an important but not urgent project you've talked about at internal meetings for months. So far, for once, you have been on track. But on Monday a longstanding client calls with two new projects; the new projects are exciting but not THAT urgent in the sense they need to cut into internal deadlines and other goals for Monday. You need to take some first steps, though, to get on top of the new matters for your client. After all, these folks are the main event.
Key ongoing internal project v. new client project. Which gets the most attention that day? Which slides? Answer: they both get attention, and neither slides. The website (long-term important) and the new client project (short-term important) are both critical projects. Years ago the Stephen Coveys and Edwards Demings out there pointed out that business people burn themselves out by waiting around only for "the urgent" in a kind of manic crisis management that keeps other important things from ever getting done or ONLY getting them done when they morph into a crisis. For lawyers, other examples would be only respecting deadlines like transaction closing dates and court-filing deadlines--to hell with everything else.
For a long time I've thought that American business schools and the training programs of global and often publicly-traded companies do a much, much better job than do law firms of training recruits to value and adhere to the structure of a plan on an item for action. It's almost as if law school and firms deem us all such "professionals" and "artists" that we are beyond learning skills of project planning and execution. What a crock. Not learning the value of pushing non-urgent but important things along at a steady pace has cost us dearly. As motivated as lawyers often are, our discipline for sticking to anything and seeing it through is often poor; again, unless it's urgent, we just don't see its value. Do our best clients run their businesses that way?
This attitude is the norm, and we lawyers--who rarely innovate or take a leadership position on anything in commerce--are just fine, thank you, with it. After all, "all the other law firms" are mediocre on the discipline of getting things done, and have "crisis-only" mentalities--why shouldn't we be that way? So we waste time blowing off important but longer term projects. Worst of all, we send to others in our firms, and especially to younger lawyers, the message: "No worries--just work on a barely adequate level; don't do things until you have to; and if it's not urgent, let it slide." As with client care and service, our standard is not only embarrassingly low, we are exporting that low standard internally whenever and wherever we can.
Posted by JD Hull at April 22, 2009 11:59 PM
Comments
I couldn't agree with this article more. In my work prior to law school and in law school, I was much more structured in how I approached my tasks. Now, I can't seem to get to anything until it's a crisis. This is obviously my own fault. I will take responsibility for it and make a change!!
Posted by: Jodie L. Hill at April 22, 2009 02:37 PM
As a small law firm manager and I.T. consultant to several law firms, I have to inject that there's a certain amount of natural selection going on here. The majority of trial lawyers that I encounter are "organizationally challenged." On the spectrum ranging from creative to disciplined, they are largely on the creative side. The creative skills are required to argue effectively in the courtroom. Attorneys that are more structured tend to practice more transactional law.
At the firm management level, there's often a balance of trial and transactional lawyers as the transactional attorneys provide the steady stream of income and the trial lawyers bring in the big settlements that boost the annual bottom line, but may not pay every monthly bill. The "herding cats" metaphor often used among my peers when discussing managing business in a law firm starts to take shape as you visualize the mixing of the aforementioned managers.
One final scattered point would be that there's an important difference between managers and leaders. Successful managers tend to be regimented, disciplined and organized. Good leaders must be creative to motivate their followers. Hence there are "business managers" and "political leaders."
Posted by: Kevin Driscoll at April 23, 2009 05:33 PM
No argument from me, Kevin, except that I think lawyers as a group--litigation or transactional people--get away with being disorganized due to a self-perceived "specialness" and value which most of them really do not have. Many non-attorney client reps--CFOs, officers, e.g.--correctly view most lawyers as not business-oriented, self-absorbed, delusional as to the value they add, and often flat out loopy.
I think that lawyers are disliked by business people (less so at GC level but it still happens) in a different way than they are disliked by the rest of the public. In short, they are viewed as "not having a plan" as to a particular problem to solve--or even being aware that they should have one.
When you hear from clients that they really like their new lawyers, it's often because the previous lawyers were so hopelessly "bad"--bad on planning and communication as well as results--and not that the new ones are all that great.
Posted by: Dan Hull at April 23, 2009 08:47 PM
As a CPA I find this struggle particularly relevant when it comes to the push/pull between compliance driven filing deadlines and value added consulting work. Sadly, it's often the value added work that takes a back seat. In my opinion the reliance on hourly billing revenue models only exacerbates the problem.
Consider what happens when clients are moved to a fixed fee that encompasses both "commodity" services such as compliance filings and "value added" services such as consulting and advisory work. With fixed fees not only is the firm driven to adapt processes and structure to attain profitability at the desired level, there's also a need to make sure the commodity service work "just happens" as a result of good business processes and there's plenty of time to address value added consulting engagements. Otherwise clients paying top dollar fixed fees will quickly disengage when the services they are paying for are continually pushed to the back burner to meet filing deadlines.
I think firms can do themselves a big favor by enlisting value billing at the same time they strive to improve workflow and project management.
Posted by: Joey Brannon at April 26, 2009 10:27 PM