leadership law firms-a4 - ark group · 2020-04-06 · effective leadership is a series of...

1

By Dr Larry Richard, founder and principal consultant, LawyerBrain LLC

RESEARCH AT Harvard Business School by John Kotter demonstrated that the felt need for leadership increases in an organization when the pace of change increases, especially external change. In times of great change, no one has perfect information about the future. Hence, leaders emerge to guide people in a particular direction despite the lack of complete information. Because of the risks and uncertainties inherent in this situation, the main capital required and utilized by leaders is trust. In order to have constituents follow them, leaders must engender sufficient trust.

This poses a distinct challenge in law firms. In recent years, law firms, like virtually all other businesses, have begun to face dramatically increasing levels of change and uncertainty, and the role of leadership has increased correspondingly. However, law firms are not like most conventional businesses, principally because they are in the business of protecting clients in a very technical way and this, in turn, requires a high degree of skepticism. It turns out that skepticism is an excellent trait to have if one wants to be a top-notch lawyer, but it’s a very undesirable trait to have if one wants to be an effective leader. When leaders are skeptical, constituents naturally act reciprocally and become skeptical of their leaders. This deprives the leader of the

very trust needed to get those constituents to become avid followers.

This interplay between trust and skepticism is but one of several challenges lawyers face in becoming excellent leaders. To better understand these challenges, let’s first look at the personality traits that are distinctive for lawyers, and then consider how they interact with the five practices of excellent leaders (based on a model developed by Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner).

Lawyer personality traitsOver the past 20-plus years, I have conducted extensive personality research with a wide variety of lawyers, mostly in the US and Canada, and mostly among partners. I have tested thousands of lawyers using a widely used assessment tool called the Caliper Profile. The Caliper measures 18 personality traits. Each trait is reported in the form of a percentile, which, by definition, tells us that your score is being compared to a norm group. For example, a 75 percent score on “assertiveness” tells us that you are more assertive than 75 percent of the people in the norm group.

When occupational subgroups are tested, while individual scores can vary widely, the larger the subgroup size, the more likely it is that the average score for each trait will hover around the 50th percentile. Lawyers, however, are outliers on six of the 18 traits, and are trending toward outlier status on a 7th trait.

Specifically, lawyers tend to score much

Leadership in law firms

Leadership_Law_Firms-A4.indd 1Leadership_Law_Firms-A4.indd 1 27/11/2014 15:0827/11/2014 15:08


2

higher in the following traits than the general public:

Skepticism; Autonomy;1

Urgency; and Abstract reasoning.

And they tend to score lower than the public in the following traits:

Sociability; Resilience; and Empathy.

Here is a brief explanation of each of the traits:

High skepticismAs noted above, this is the hallmark trait for practicing high-quality law. Those scoring high on this trait tend to question assertions made by others. They don’t tend to give others the benefit of the doubt. They may wonder what hidden motives lurk behind ordinary behaviors. And they scrutinize documents, decisions, and rules.

High autonomyThose scoring high on this trait like to be in control – they don’t like others telling them what to do. Their preferred guidance system is internal, not external. When others ask them to do something, they will decide if it fits their own criteria first. Surely it is this trait which has led so many to describe managing lawyers as a task akin to “herding cats”.

High urgencyThose scoring high on this trait are impatient. They seek closure. They can’t stand waiting. They may finish others’ sentences. They often are described by others as “ready-fire-aim” people.

High abstract reasoningThose scoring high on this trait love to analyze, solve problems, and use their intellect. This is a hallmark trait of lawyers. It’s the number one trait that explains who goes into law as well as who stays in law. Overuse of this trait can lead to the classic “analysis paralysis”.

Low sociabilityThose scoring low on this trait are very private socially. They prefer not to disclose a lot about their personal life, their vulnerabilities, or their relationships. They don’t tend to pay as much attention to the personal lives of others (compared to high-scoring individuals). It takes them a long time to initiate an intimate connection with another person. They often tend to see relationships and related themes as “touch-feely”, lower in importance, or awkward.

Low resilienceThose scoring low on this trait are thin-skinned in the face of criticism, rejection, or setbacks. They get defensive quite easily, and often feel a need to explain and justify their behavior to others. They can be easily wounded by a critical comment, or even by a client’s failure to return a call. Lawyers consistently score very low on this trait. In fact, over the past 20 years, over 90 percent of the lawyers we test score in the bottom half of this trait.

Low empathyIn my initial research on lawyers, their average “empathy” score was 63 percent.2 However, as I have gathered more data over the years, the average score has become lower and lower. These days, the average empathy score for partners I test hovers around 41 percent.

“Empathy” requires some explanation


Leadership in Law Firms: An Expert Guide

3

– there are at least two kinds of empathy – emotional empathy and cognitive empathy. Emotional empathy has a connotation of stepping into the shoes of another person and feeling what they feel, as in “I feel your pain”. Cognitive empathy, by contrast, has a connotation of understanding another person – intellectually understanding their point of view, their feelings, how they might react to something, or why they behave in the way they do. Those scoring low on this trait generally pay attention to their own agenda when interacting with others. It may take them additional cognitive effort to shift their attention to enter the world of the other person. A low-scoring individual may or may not actually be skilled at doing this – the score is not a measure of skill – but rather it measures one’s inclination to pay attention to the experience, goals, reactions, etc., of the other person as opposed to one’s own experience, etc.

Kouzes and Posner’s five leadership practicesWith this backdrop, let’s look at the research that reveals the qualities of effective leaders, and consider what challenges we might face in law firms in our efforts to develop leaders with these qualities.

Effective leadership is a series of behaviors. The leading empirical model of effective leadership has been developed by Jim Kouzes and Barry Posner, authors of the best-selling book The Leadership Challenge. Here are the five core practices, according to over 30 years’ worth of research that they’ve conducted, that the most effective leaders do and do well, paraphrased from their writings:

Model the wayLeaders serve as role models. They set an example for others to follow. And they

establish standards of excellence about how people should be treated, how goals should be pursued, etc.

Inspire a shared visionLeaders passionately believe that they can make a difference. They envision the future, creating an ideal and unique image of what the organization can become. Through their magnetism and quiet persuasion, leaders enlist others in their dreams. They breathe life into their visions and get people to see exciting possibilities for the future.

Challenge the processLeaders search for opportunities to change the status quo. They look for innovative ways to improve the organization. In doing so, they experiment and take risks. And because leaders know that risk-taking involves mistakes and failures, they accept the inevitable disappointments as learning opportunities.

Enable others to actLeaders foster collaboration and build spirited teams. They actively involve others. Leaders understand that mutual respect is what sustains extraordinary efforts; they strive to create an atmosphere of trust and human dignity. They strengthen others, making each person feel capable and powerful.

Encourage the heartAccomplishing extraordinary things in organizations is hard work. To keep hope and determination alive, leaders recognize contributions that individuals make. In every winning team, the members need to share in the rewards of their efforts, so leaders celebrate accomplishments. They make people feel like heroes.



4

Effect of personality on leadershipHow do the common lawyer personality traits affect the execution of these five practices?

Model the wayEffective leaders build trust, treat others with respect, listen well, and subordinate their own interests to those of the organization. Skepticism, the hallmark trait of lawyers, is the opposite of trust.

The good news: although most personality traits are more genetic than learned, skepticism is a mostly learned trait. This means that a lawyer-leader could conceivably be skeptical in his/her lawyer role, and dial back their skepticism in their leadership role. In actual practice, however, this is rare.

Urgency is another challenge that lawyer-leaders need to manage in order to increase their leadership effectiveness. It is generally an advantage to be urgent in managing a case for a client – clients usually place a high value on responsiveness. However, urgency can interfere with a leader’s efforts to be open-minded and to be a good listener. One can learn to manage urgency, but it generally takes intense coaching, lots of rehearsal, and patience.

Inspire a shared visionThe most powerful visions are positive portraits of a desired future that evoke a passionate desire in the hearts of constituents. Skepticism again becomes a potential spoiler for lawyer-leaders seeking to inspire. Lawyers are trained to spot problems, identify risks, and focus on what won’t work. By contrast, leaders need to arouse constituents’ passion about what will work.

Challenge the processLeaders take risks. No leader ever

has complete information, so leaders must choose a direction with imperfect information. Lawyers are trained to avoid risk. In particular, the low “resilience” scores of lawyers induce them to avoid taking any action for which they might be criticized. Leaders are far more often the targets of criticism than others are, and they need to be thick-skinned enough to tolerate the criticism. Luckily, resilience is another exceptional trait that has a strong learned component, which means that lawyers can learn to become much more resilient by applying a relatively simple set of cognitive strategies and rehearsing them until they become habitual.

Enable others to actLeaders foster teamwork. They realize that they can’t do it all themselves, and they willingly involve others in moving a goal forward. Lawyers with high “autonomy” scores like to retain as much control as they can. This is further amplified not by personality, but by the ethic that permeates the legal profession of protecting confidentiality. This mindset leads many lawyer-leaders to guard information closely and only provide it to those with a “need to know”. This strategy, unfortunately, can lead to an emphasis on individual performance, undermine teamwork, lower trust, and place greater responsibility on the shoulders of the leader instead of allowing him/her to share responsibility with others.

Encourage the heartFinally, leaders are generous in recognizing the efforts of others, and in rewarding small steps that incrementally move toward the larger goal. The low “sociability” scores of lawyers can make them insensitive to this valuable practice, and avoidant of praise, which they often see as “touchy-feely”.



5

This deprives the lawyer-leader of one of the most effective forms of non-monetary reward.

What you can do about itLest you think that it’s impossible for lawyers to be effective leaders, let me offer a ray of hope. Think of personality traits as one’s “default” strategy for approaching the world, or as one’s “comfort zone”. A personality trait describes how we prefer to behave when no other factors are influencing our behavior.

However, human beings are excellent at learning new behaviors, and provided there is sufficient motivation to improve, nearly any lawyer can learn how to manage their strongest personality traits so that they can be toned down when you’re in a leadership role.

The key to this kind of “management” is mental rehearsal – the more one practices new ways of responding in old, familiar situations, the more likely it is that you can build new repertoires of behavior. Let me give you an example from my own experience. I have a very high “urgency” score. In fact, I score in the 99th percentile. That means I’m more urgent than 99 percent of the norm group. That also means that my comfort zone is manifested by my finishing others’ sentences, jumping to conclusions, and being impulsive.

These qualities can be quite helpful in some situations, but they are toxic in a leadership role. The key to managing any personality trait is to become aware of the “thought” that takes place between the “stimulus” and the “response”, and then to modify that thought.

Contemporary psychological science has demonstrated that “thoughts” lead directly to “feelings”, which lead to “behaviors”, and thus if you become conscious of your

thoughts, and modify them, you thereby produce a different feeling, and ultimately a different behavior.

This sequence – often called the “CBT model” after cognitive-behavioral therapy (the field in which this model was developed) – is very effective in managing a wide range of behaviors, and it’s quite possible to see a significant amount of improvement in managing unwanted behaviors even through a self-help strategy. Knowledgeable coaching can effectuate even more profound and long-lasting change.

In summaryTo summarize, rapid change produces a need for effective leadership. Law firms are undergoing just such rapid change, and need leadership. However, the kinds of personality traits that typify lawyers – and which can help them to be really excellent lawyers – can inhibit their excellence as leaders. Nevertheless, a mindful lawyer-leader who is willing to mentally rehearse new thoughts and behavioral repertoires can dramatically improve their leadership effectiveness.

About the authorDr Larry Richard practiced law for ten years, and then earned a PhD in psychology. He chaired the leadership practice at Hildebrandt International for seven years before founding his own firm, LawyerBrain LLC, which provides consulting services to the leaders of the largest law firms. You can find his blog at www.lawyerbrainblog.com.

References

1. The Caliper doesn’t measure “autonomy”

per se; it measures a trait called “external

structure”. When an external structure score is

low, it often means that the individual has a

higher need for autonomy, and vice versa.



6

I just find it more user-friendly to speak of this

trait as “autonomy”.

2. This didn’t make sense at the time, and it

makes even less sense now. Either my sample

was skewed, or lawyers’ cognitive empathy

scores have become lower, or both.


7

By Julious P. Smith, Jr., chairman emeritus of Williams Mullen

ARE GREAT leaders born or made? Much like the debate about heredity vs environment, no quick answer presents itself. Strong arguments and anecdotal evidence support both positions. Debating “born vs made” may be fun and intellectually stimulating, but does it really matter? The answer is yes. It matters in the context of having a viable succession plan. Choosing the next leader involves recognizing the attributes of leadership (born) and fostering those attributes (made). Succession training forms an important part of any law firm’s future, but knowing who to put in the program is as important as the program itself. So it does matter.

Recently, the prevailing view on leadership has changed from a focus on the “born” leader to the “created” leader. A cynic might add that much of that change came from consultants selling leadership training to law firms and other businesses. Regardless of the source, experts today believe that leaders can be created. Firms spend time and resources on training people for leadership positions. That type of training first became popular in the early 2000s. Classes both in and out of the office focused on making lawyers better leaders. On a more global scale, most colleges now offer a degree in leadership. These efforts certainly pay dividends. Do they prove you can create a leader where no basic skills exist? Hardly.

Compelling arguments can be made for both the born leader and the made leader. The born leader theory points to the eight year old picked to be captain of the kickball team. That same person becomes the CEO of a major company. Their leadership skills showed as a young boy or girl. Statistics that show the overwhelming success rate of people that captain school teams support a correlation between early leadership and lifetime achievement. Obviously, the argument goes, these are all instances of born leaders. Meanwhile consultants spend long hours with young (and old) lawyers teaching them the fine art of leadership.

So which is it? A leader is born or made? The answer is probably both. No matter how much training someone has, without certain qualities they will never be a great leader. Undoubtedly, all great leaders possess some of the same traits. Those traits form a strong beginning for success as a leader, but the traits must be polished and expanded upon to guarantee that success. Without training and opportunity, someone with all the requisite attributes can fail.

Beginning with the born leader, what traits must he have to succeed? The number one trait is the desire to lead. No one successfully leads a business, a sports team, or any type of venture without a burning desire to do so. That desire can be honed and shaped into a better package, but without the basic desire to lead, the training usually goes to waste. That desire comes from many different sources: self-confidence;

Leaders: Born or made?


8


a need to help people improve; a belief that they can do something better than others; or simply “not riding well in the backseat”. It does not matter why – all great leaders want to lead. What other traits do great leaders possess?

Leadership begins with communication Without the ability to communicate, no leader can succeed. Communication can manifest itself in a charismatic personality or an acquired one-on-one approach to problem-solving. The successful leader can be an extrovert or an introvert. The leader is someone who tailors their communication method and style to their skillset and comfort level. The method varies, but the end product remains constant – communication. To use their skills successfully, the leader must want to connect with their constituents. Much like the desire to lead, the desire to communicate may be a “born” trait. Communication in leadership means more than an ability to give a good speech, write a meaningful email, or resolve disputes. Communication means the ability and desire to sit with someone face to face, and attempt to help them improve. The leader’s success or failure will ultimately turn on their communication skills.

In the modern era, where emails and texts predominate, the face-to-face meeting appears to be vanishing. An effective leader cannot let that happen. They motivate their people by meeting with them. They use those meetings to make people better at what they do. Communication skills can be honed and improved, but the willingness and desire to communicate probably comes from the cradle. Even with that strong natural base, the leader must work to improve their communication skills. Each opportunity to communicate becomes a lesson on what to

do and what not to do. Being a successful communicator requires practice, work, and a desire to improve.

The importance of decision-makingWhile the ability to communicate heads the list of necessary leadership skills, decisiveness comes in a close second. Successful leaders absorb the facts, understand the issues, and make decisions. Decisiveness manifests itself in courage and self-confidence. Experience helps develop both of those traits. Without the base of a strong character, experience alone won’t give the leader the innate strength to excel at decision making.

Athletics present many examples of courage and self-confidence. What makes one player want the ball at the end of a close game and another run away from it? How is one successful team led by a loud motivator and another by a quiet hard worker? A good leader embraces the need to make decisions. He wants the opportunity to make the tough call and keep the firm moving in the right direction.

Experience helps the leader to make decisions, and it enables them to know how to communicate those decisions. Only through trial and error can the leader grasp the impact of a good decision, a bad decision, or no decision. The “experience factor” also creates an understanding of how to make a decision. Good leaders possess the strength to make tough decisions. Unfortunately, the courage to make decisions alone won’t carry the day. That skill needs to be shaped on the anvil of experience. The ability to make the right decision comes from the opportunity to make a choice when it matters. Decision-making, strength of character, and confidence all come naturally to successful leaders.



9

Communication skills and decisiveness create trust among the leader’s constituents. People like predictability and stability. That breeds trust. To succeed, a leader must command the trust and respect of their constituents. No matter how many leadership traits someone possesses, no one will follow them unless they trust them. Leaders build trust through demonstrated performance. They also build trust through demeanor and attitude. Demonstrated performance comes through experience. Demeanor and attitude generally come with the person, but even those traits require seasoning. The ability to remain calm under fire and to be responsive improves with the opportunities to face tough decisions. Yet without the ability to respond to crisis and challenge, all of the experience in the world won’t help. Essentially, skills can be sharpened and expanded, but they must first exist.

A leader’s visionLeaders possess communication skills and the courage to make decisions. They command the trust of their constituents. Where does that take the firm? Nowhere, unless the leader has a vision, and a plan to achieve that vision. A vision represents a strategic direction for the firm. A plan is the roadmap developed to achieve that vision. Successful leaders not only know where they want the firm to go, they know how to get them there.

The vision becomes the last page of the book. The plan starts with page one and builds everything to get to that conclusion. A successful vision often comes from the ability to understand where the firm should go and what success looks like. Not all leaders can do that. A plan to achieve that vision comes through hours of on-the-job training. The plan requires buy-in and participation from constituents. Good leaders understand

how to achieve that buy-in. They learn what works and what does not. This happens only through experience, and the trial and error that it brings. Mistakes that are not fatal do as much to shape a leader as successes. Of course, too many mistakes will very quickly sidetrack the opportunity to make further decisions.

Assume the leader can make decisions, communicate with their constituents, create trust, and develop and execute a strategic plan. Is that enough? Maybe. Possessing those abilities goes a long way to guaranteeing success. In fact, without those abilities the leader cannot succeed. Unfortunately, even with those abilities they can still fail. Raw talent needs to be used and enhanced. Without the opportunity to hone their skills, the leader will have a tough time being successful. The more athletes practice and repeat plays, the better they get. The same holds true with leaders. The more they make decisions, the better they get at it. The more they communicate those decisions to people, the better communicators they become. So, the potentially great leader who has no opportunity to lead will not grow or ever fully utilize their skills. The great American football coach Bear Byrant once described “luck” as when preparation met opportunity. Leadership can be described the same way. A person with leadership skills who prepares himself to lead will be well served when opportunity knocks. So how does someone prepare himself to meet opportunity head on?

First and foremost, he needs to make tough decisions that affect others. He needs to communicate those decisions to the interested parties. By doing so, he understands how hard it is to make a decision and how much harder it is to stay with that decision. How does he get this


10


opportunity? He has to be given some level of responsibility within the firm. It can start with the practice group, a team within a practice group, or simply leading a special project. To develop leadership skills one has to have the opportunity to lead. Whether it is leading two people or a thousand, a leader needs to understand what leadership requires and needs to get better at it.

Creating better leadersToday individual coaches spend a great deal of time with lawyers trying to make them better leaders. Some of these efforts are a waste of time. Even a great coach can’t turn someone lacking the innate qualities of leadership into a successful leader. When someone with great leadership characteristics combines with a coach devoted to honing those skills, the result can be quite impressive. Coaching works, but only if the protégé possesses the skill and desire to lead. Management must identify future leaders, give them the chance to lead, and coach them at the leadership trade.

Management can play a big role in developing leaders by giving them honest feedback. As stated above, trial and error plays a huge part in any leader’s development. Yet, many errors go unnoticed by the aspiring leader. Whether through benevolence or neglect, management rarely gives a young leader an honest evaluation of their effectiveness. Instead, management often lets him continue to make the same mistakes time after time. Most find it easier to move on to a new leader rather than to explain what someone did right or wrong. Some young leaders flourish from day one and need no feedback. Those are the exception. More likely, the lawyer needs someone to sit with them periodically to explain what they need to improve on.

ConclusionSo is a leader born or made? The jury is definitely still out. Once again, the simple answer is “both”. Great leaders want to lead. In fact, they have a real desire to do so. They also possess certain innate talents. Conversely, without experience of actually leading, those talents will never be developed. The firm must give its young lawyers opportunities to lead and with these opportunities should come coaching and feedback. Combining leadership skills with a proactive training program will insure meaningful succession planning and strong future leadership.

About the authorJulious P. Smith, Jr is the chairman emeritus of Williams Mullen. He served as CEO of the firm from 1 February 1984 to 31 January 2010. Under Mr. Smith’s leadership, Williams Mullen grew from 25 lawyers in Richmond, Virginia, to over 300 in 12 offices in Virginia, North Carolina, Washington, D.C., and London. Gross revenues increased from approximately $4.5 million to $150 million. During his tenure as CEO, Mr. Smith initiated six mergers with law firms ranging in size from 20 to 55 lawyers.

His practice includes representing and advising business clients in corporate and business matters, including succession planning and mergers and acquisitions. He has specific experience in closely-held businesses, insurance brokers, and family businesses. His merger and acquisition experience ranges from small family businesses to major transactions involving publicly-traded companies. Mr. Smith also consults with law firms on business-related issues.

Mr Smith is listed in The Best Lawyers in America and in Virginia Business magazine’s list of “Legal Elite”. He has been



11

recognized as a leading corporate attorney by Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business. In addition, Mr. Smith has been named a “Super Lawyer” for Business/Corporate by Virginia Super Lawyers magazine. He is a past president of the Richmond, Virginia, Bar Association. He graduated from Hampden-Sydney College in 1965 and served as a trustee of that institution and as vice-chairman of its board of trustees.


13

By Harry Trueheart, chairman emeritus of Nixon Peabody, LLP

IT MIGHT be said that more has been written about law firm leadership development than has actually been done about it. The knowledge about what is needed is available, but turning that knowledge into embodied skills remains the tough part. We continue to read debates about the full-time leader versus the part-time leader, the unpaid volunteer versus the paid leader, and (the most basic of all) the debate about the value that the partners in law firms are willing to assign to leadership.

While these debates go on, a record is building of those leaders that have succeeded and those that have failed. Fairly viewed, that record makes the case for skilled leadership increasingly clear and is motivating well-managed firms to put in place leadership development programs. The better programs start leadership training at an early stage of the lawyer’s career, focusing first on matter management and leading ad hoc teams that work on matters, teaching fundamental business skills, and then adding additional skills training as lawyers become partners and partners become leaders.

My premise for this article is that one of the crucial later steps in developing successful law firm leaders, and good choices for a firm’s next managing partner, is to develop a cadre of successful practice group leaders. These practice group leaders will have had a variety of lesser leadership

experiences and on-going training before they are selected for these roles. I will focus on the practice group leader’s role and their developmental potential.

Practice group leadership roles, correctly defined to parallel how the firm should operate, have the most impact on firm success and are the best final training ground for leading the whole firm. The experience and related training and coaching that group leaders get should translate to improved firm performance and be scalable to the managing partner role. To be a good training ground, a practice group should be analogous to a strategic business unit, and its leader needs to have a key role in running that business. This is a distinctly different role than the predominantly administrative one that many practice group leaders fill.

Today, practice group leadership is an ideal training ground for future senior leadership roles. In many law firms, practice groups are larger and further flung even than the firm itself was only a few years ago. Practice groups are in fact becoming “lines of business” for the firm, with the need to develop skills, satisfy clients, develop new products, market, and sell. The groups now need to recruit and manage large numbers of staff, to develop talent, and to handle most of the other things a fair-sized business or law firm needs to do.

Plan for practice group leadership developmentThe first step in planning leadership

Law firm leadership development: The practice group leader path to law firm leadership



14

development is to ask what a successful practice group or law firm needs. From that list you can build a list of skills your leaders need, and from that list you can formulate a leadership development plan. Here are a few suggestions for what a practice group or firm needs:

A good business strategy; A plan to implement the strategy; Excellent people who are aligned

with the strategy and plan, and are enthusiastic about working on them;

Flexibility and adaptability to adjust to a turbulent market;

A commitment to extraordinary service; Professional and financial discipline and

accountability; and A team-oriented culture.

The needed skillsThe next question is what skills should a leader have to help the group meet those needs? While skills may vary depending on the nature of the practice group, I suggest the following essential list:

A high degree of emotional intelligence; Organizational skills; The ability to lead the development of a

strategy and a plan; The ability to use the strategy and the plan

as a guide to all of the smaller, immediate decisions that have to be made;

A drive to see the plan implemented and the group succeed;

An ability to recognize talent, and a desire to develop others and see them succeed;

The ability to lead change; Flexibility and the adaptability to manage

in a turbulent market; Good communications skills and a

dedication to using them;

An ability to approach difficult conversations effectively;

The ability to motivate the people in the group or firm;

Political savvy; The ability to manage people at a

distance, across a firm’s multiple offices; Proven success, at some stage, as a

practitioner and business developer, though not necessarily at the highest levels;

A greater commitment to the team than to oneself;

The trust and respect of one’s partners and employees; and

Resilience.

An effective leader is someone who:

Can ensure that the group develops a vision, strategy, and goals, and can keep them foremost in everyone’s mind;

Makes integrated business decisions that continuously move the group forward;

Can be flexible and adaptable to changing markets;

Makes personnel judgments of all kinds that build a winning team;

Builds a successful collaborative team that is well integrated in the firm; and

Ensures that the “trains run on time” in the group.

It should be very clear to the reader that no one individual possesses all these skills to an equal degree. Thus, the most important skill that needs to be on the list is the ability to recognize one’s own weaknesses and to supplement them with the skills of others. The most important point is that a leader needs to ensure that the organization gets the job done, and not attempt to do it all him or herself. Knowing how to harness the skills of the group as a whole is essential.



15

A note about the personal characteristics of lawyersUnderstanding the characteristics of both the leaders and followers in law firms is important in formulating a leadership development program within a firm.

The work of Dr Larry Richard and others has highlighted what many of us have long observed: lawyers are, on average, great thinkers and problem solvers. However, we are by nature highly sceptical and less trusting or accepting than those in many other professions. We value autonomy highly, dislike rules and routine, and often prefer the role of individual contributor to that of team member. We are, on average, less sociable than the general public. In the terms of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, we are more introverted than extroverted. We have a high sense of urgency and are often impatient, looking for quick solutions and results. We are more likely to be thin-skinned and defensive. And those of us trained in the common law had a heavy indoctrination into the adversarial system – to instinctively believe in conflict and competition rather than cooperation.

A number of years ago, my firm engaged the services of one of the leading corporate leadership development organizations to help us train future leaders of the firm. The program used extensive tools for measuring the personal characteristics of those in the training program. The results closely paralleled those found by Dr Richard a number of years later in a study of a much larger cohort of lawyers.

Not surprisingly, these are traits that, on the whole, do not match those of successful leaders, who tend to be extroverted, team and future-oriented, more emotionally intelligent, and thick-skinned. They accomplish their work through relationships and social

networks, and work on a mix of short- and long-term goals. They build and perpetuate teams and institutions. They believe in coordinated action more than “Lone Ranger” tactics.

Lawyering skills that are helpful to leadership roles include:

Intelligence; A capacity for hard work; Analytical and problem-solving skills; Communication skills; Client-relationship skills; and, of course Substantive skills in the group’s area of

practice.

Those skills and traits that are not helpful, in excessive quantities, include:

Adversarial skills; Problem finding; A do-it-yourself mentality; Personal competitiveness; Ego; A preference for giving advice rather

than making decisions; Perfectionism; Risk avoidance; A lack of organisational skills; and An overdeveloped use of confidentiality.

A good, simple test is: does the particular lawyering skill work well at home? If not, it probably will not work well in leading the practice group. Leadership training should include significant efforts to enhance the under-developed skills of lawyers and moderate the over-developed skills.

A note about leadership stylesIn addition to skills, much has been written about leadership styles. Here is a quick take on styles that seem to work in law firms – and some that do not suit as the dominant



16

trait. It is important to note that any style can be tempered and supplemented.

In general, the coaching style seems best suited to leading highly motivated, successful professionals. I will omit the usual sports analogies because I am sure they come quickly to mind. The charismatic leader can also be effective, provided the leader has a strong team around them to actually get something done. In a homogeneous and highly motivated practice group, a referee style may be all that is necessary.

Several styles that do not seem to work well, if they define the individual, include the “foreman”, the “numbers guy”, the “administrator” or “bureaucrat”, or the “counter-cultural-ist” – that is, the one who rallies the team by identifying the common enemy, which can be another group, another office, or even the firm itself.

Good leadership development should define a style that is effective within the current culture of the firm and in part trains leaders in that style. The reason for the qualification is that, as the market changes, firm strategies may also change, and firm cultures need to change with these. A change in culture may require a different style of leadership and, with that, different training.

Developing practice group leaders Job descriptionPractice group leader positions should have job descriptions. What could the job description of a 21st-century practice group leader look like? The practice group leader should have responsibility for or significant influence over:

Group strategy; Planning and implementation; Group revenue and expense budgets; New business intake and pricing; Associate and paralegal hiring and

utilization;

Associate promotion and termination; Marketing and sales budgets; Professional standards in the delivery of

services; Client service standards; Loss prevention; Training and development; Partner recruiting and promotion; Partner performance evaluation; and Partner compensation and status

recommendations.

The job description should also include responsibility for the morale and job satisfaction of the group. These are all factors that will materially affect the success of the group. Of course, the job description needs to match the responsibilities the firm assigns to the groups as a whole. In the end, the job description should read much like the managing partner job description, but scaled to the practice group. The job description needs to be shared within the firm, particularly among the partners, and an effort needs to be made to build consensus around the role and its importance to firm success.

Coaching and trainingCoaching is essential in leadership development. The “coach-in-chief” needs to be the firm managing partner. Their oversight and interactions with group leaders will be a major factor in their training. To supplement this, group and individual coaching is employed by some firms to help develop leaders. It is also possible to mix leadership skills training with follow-up coaching on the skills being taught. The model is a good one; however, securing commitment to follow-up is a challenge. There are many “executive” coaches plying their skills, including some with law firm experience. Since coaching is inherently situational, the most effective coaches will understand the law firm context.



17

Training should be done in a variety of settings. I recommend a mix of intensive off-site training and shorter topical and timely trainings, which, for example, can be mixed into agendas for group leader meetings. My firm has used both with some success. The shorter topical trainings work well with day-to-day issues, while the more intense ones are better suited to training for deeper, longer-term skill development.

Goals, accountability, and developmental evaluationA significant opportunity for learning and development is an annual evaluation for each leader. In my experience, such a process should include three, equally important elements:

1. A self-evaluation prepared by each leader;

2. An evaluation prepared by the leader’s “superior”; and

3. Confidential feedback from those being led.

It is important to recognize that some leaders are much better at “managing up” than “managing down” and that, without this broad feedback, firm leaders are often in the dark as to what is actually going on in the group. The results of these evaluations are best conveyed in a developmental context with the purpose of both encouraging and reinforcing good behaviors and dealing with problematic ones. These reviews can help to focus training on missing experiences or skills that need further development.

Separate in concept from the developmental review is a performance review in which the practice group leader is reviewed against the goals for the leader and the group for the prior year. The predicate for this review is a clear

understanding of what those goals were for both the leader and the group.

It is equally important that there be a clear understanding of the expectations for the leader regarding the balance of leadership time and personal practice time, and the results expected in both areas. The concept that “people will do what you pay and not what you say” applies to law firm partners. It is important that leaders clearly understand where the firm stands on this point and are treated fairly. If a firm wants pro bono leadership, that is a choice to be made. But if it wants to pay for effective leadership, the firm will need a system of accountability, evaluation, and reward in which the leaders and the partnership as a whole have a reasonable degree of confidence. There are few things that undermine commitment to effective leadership more than confusion about its value to the firm.

The crucial role of the managing partnerThe way in which the firm’s managing partner manages and deals with practice group leaders is crucial to their successful training. Consider these questions. Does the managing partner:

Appropriately delegate operating decisions to the group leaders?

Seek input from those leaders on decisions that impact the group’s success?

Listen to that input? Work through the practice group leaders,

or around them? Plan for and oversee the development of

practice group leaders? Take the time to coach, rather than just

direct, the practice group leaders?

An important responsibility of the managing partner is to build and maintain a strong



18

leadership team. That should be a goal for which the managing partner is accountable to the firm. In other words, accountability at the top for effective leadership development is important to achieving successful results.

ConclusionLaw firms have an easy time understanding that on-the-job training, coaching, formal training, accountability, and reward are part of developing successful practicing partners. It should not be surprising that the same approach can work in developing effective law firm leaders.

About the authorHarry Trueheart served as the chairman, managing partner, and chief executive officer of Nixon Peabody LLP for 14 years and in prior years as chairman of its policy committee, managing partner, and in a variety of other leadership capacities.

Under Mr Trueheart’s leadership, Nixon Peabody grew to be a national and international firm with offices in major US and international markets. He led Nixon Peabody to be recognized as a Fortune 100 Best Place to Work. His firm was an early adopter of modern management principles and technology in the practice of law. Working with the Center for Creative Leadership and others he developed leadership training programs for law firm partners who, at the time, were accustomed to being individual contributing professionals and were untrained in leading large groups of peers and subordinates.

He is a fellow of the College of Law Practice Management. He has been a frequent speaker and writer on law firm management issues. He has also written on strategic planning, quality management, and project management in the context of the legal profession.

Mr Trueheart is currently chairman emeritus of Nixon Peabody LLP and chair and CEO of Terralex, a global law firm network of more than 150 firms with more than 17, 000 lawyers in 100 countries. He can be contacted at [email protected].


19

By Joel A. Rose, president of Joel A. Rose & Associates Inc.

FINANCIAL STABILITY within a law firm practice does not guarantee harmony within the partnership itself – far from it. Law firm management that does not acknowledge or reflect the importance of firm leadership and the contributions and needs of its members endangers a firm’s cohesiveness and its very existence, no matter how many clients come through the front door.

This article begins by examining the case of a hypothetical mid-size law firm, Baxter, Rice & Stern, which is approaching a leadership crisis. By exploring the problems facing the firm, resulting from its lack of leadership, some changes and solutions could suggest themselves to firms that may not know they have problems or wish to avoid certain problems in the future.

The relationship between leadership and management in more successful law firms

Hypothetical firm – Real problemsBaxter, Rice & Stern is at a crossroads. It is no longer the firm founded 18 years ago by three partners, Ed, Tom, and George, who left a larger firm because of their dissatisfaction with a big firm setting. Today, their own firm is run by a management committee comprised of the three senior (and founding) partners. The committee determines policy, makes major decisions affecting the firm, and sets partner compensation. Partner meetings are held monthly. The firm agenda and summaries of financial reports are distributed to partners at the meetings.

During the last three years, Baxter Rice has acquired two smaller firms. Although these acquisitions have been successful from an economic standpoint, the acquired partners and a few of the firm’s mid-level and junior partners have begun grumbling about the firm’s lack of leadership and direction going forward. Although the firm’s overall client base appears to be solid, in light of the highly competitive market in which the firm practices, several partners believe that more innovative plans must be developed to address the internal and external trends that are most likely to affect the future of the firm generally. These changes include considering adding one or two other practice areas so the firm can provide better service to its key clients and planning for a smoother transition when some of the older partners step down for reasons of age, health, etc.

Several of the younger and mid-level partners are familiar with many of the current trends for promoting the firm, developing new client business, and investing in lawyer additions in growth-oriented practice areas. However, they resent the negative responses given by several senior and mid-level partners concerning the investment of firm capital to upgrade the firm’s technology


20


to facilitate the production of client work. These feelings of frustration are not unreasonable from the younger firm members’ point of view. They have not necessarily received the benefits of these long-term relationships and, more to the point, they have not been invited to participate in their cultivation. Also, they resent the overly conservative attitude of senior partners to spend firm money to invest in the future of the firm.

While these factors might indicate that the problems the firm is facing stem from the issue of age and the unwillingness of the older partners to spend money to progress the firm, these challenges are not necessarily at the heart of the crisis. The problem of lack of firm leadership has been built into the system, layer by layer, over the years. In order to plan effectively for the future, firm management must delve within and undo the chain of events, issue by issue, that has led to its present crisis. The firm needs more and better leadership to conduct more strategic planning to determine what the partners would like the firm to become, going forward.

The scenarioEd Baxter is the senior managing partner and a member of the executive committee. His contacts and reputation have been the firm’s mainstay since its inception. Tom Rice is the second member of the executive committee. His ancestors’ good works have kept many doors open to the firm. George Stern is the third member of the committee. He sits on a lot of boards and has toyed with the idea of running for political office in the city. These three partners are quite satisfied in the manner in which the firm has evolved and would like to keep it that way until they decide to reduce their active involvement in the firm.

Fred has been a partner for two years, and Sam will be a partner by the end of the year. There are many other such Freds and Sams at the firm. Imagine that the following exchange takes place between Ed Baxter and Tom Rice late one morning:

“Tom, have you seen Fred?”“He was around earlier. Check with his secretary. Say, are we hiring that real estate guy?”“I won’t be there, but George will announce it at tomorrow’s firm meeting. We’ll also

probably want to see that labor specialist for a final wrap up. There’ll be some shifting around down there once he’s aboard but that area is flexible. Eileen, tell Fred I’m ready to see those contracts.”

“I’m sorry Mr. Baxter, Fred is at a director’s meeting this afternoon.”“Did they ask for him?”“I didn’t take the call.”“Sam, this is Ed Baxter. Could we get together about some contracts I need for a meeting

in the morning?”

While this exchange is taking place, junior partner Fred is on the road, cultivating his own patch. Given the present state of affairs at the firm, he feels justified in setting his own strategy for success. While the client he is seeing is not yet the firm’s largest, it will be after Fred meets with the company’s directors this afternoon. Then, at tomorrow’s firm meeting, he will make his own announcement.



21

Exercising leadershipEvery partnership, no matter the size, needs leadership. Leadership and management need to exist in every law firm. A financially and professionally successful law firm does not simply evolve. It must be built in an orderly and systematic manner based upon five principle factors:

1. The values that are important to the partners of a firm;

2. The external changes affecting the firm over which the partners may exercise little or no control;

3. The internal changes within the firm over which the partners may exercise some or complete control;

4. The motivational needs and incentives required by the partners to satisfy their professional, personal, and financial objectives; and

5. The competitive market(s) in which the firm practices.

The terms “leadership” and “management” of a law firm must go hand in hand, but they are not synonymous. In simplistic terms, the “leadership” role is the ability of an individual or group of partners to influence other attorneys – partners and associates – to follow in the achievement of common goals. The “management” role, on the other hand, is the coordination by the managing partner and/or by the management committee of the cooperative activities of all or most of the attorneys for executing the functions of planning, controlling, organizing, staffing, directing, and taking corrective actions, as required.

Leaders are innovative and focus more on ideas and the abilities and talents of other members of the firm to achieve the firm’s immediate and longer term objectives. Managers focus on process and concentrate

more on how things get done.Clearly, in any law firm there may

be leaders who are not managers and managers who are not leaders. In the ideal situation there are individual partners or a committee of partners whose members possess the appropriate balance of leadership and management skills for the firm to be professionally and financially successful.

Partners must be willingTwo organizational components that are essential for a professionally and financially successful law firm – leadership and management – call for all of the partners to agree to subordinate some degree of their independence and autonomy to a managing partner or a management committee. As the result, those partners who are perceived to be firm leaders and other members of the firm are typically connected by a formal or informal understanding that bind them morally, intellectually, and emotionally in their desire to achieve common goals.

All of the attorneys in the firm need to recognize that the impetus for successful leadership is derived from the willingness of all firm members to “follow” and “be governed”. In other words, the partners must strike a balance between their rights as owners and their responsibilities as citizens of the firm. They must relinquish some personal prerogatives in order to achieve the overall results that they would not be able to attain on their own.

In theory, all partners are created equal. By dint of partnership status they are accorded the same rights and privileges. As many firms discover, though, this is not the case in practice. Invariably, each partner has his or her own idea about how to perform the job, and partners exercise their authority accordingly.



22

In some firms, the leadership role is assumed easily and naturally because the partner serving as the managing partner may be either a founding partner or a partner who controls a significant client base. In firms in which the partners are relatively young and inexperienced, the process of “natural selection”, as it were, may be somewhat more difficult if not virtually impossible. In situations in which no partner surfaces as a natural leader, or no one wants the job, the firm must take aggressive action if it wishes to obtain leadership in order to grow and satisfy the professional, economic, and personal objectives of its members.

What partners expect from their firm’s leadersWhat kind of person makes a good leader? Generally, lawyers are not recruited to a law firm on the basis of their leadership skills. Consequently, lawyers’ leadership skills are greatly varied.

The requisites for leadership are, in this day and age, well known. The leader must garner respect and support, have clout, and wield it when necessary. The leader’s skills must combine judgment, timing, and vision.

Those partners who are successful leaders must keep the objectives of the firm in proper perspective. They must be able to rise above the “self” and understand that the good of their firms must come first.

One significant problem in many of today’s law firms is the paucity of partners who are true firm leaders. There are plenty of partners who are capable of managing but, in the eyes of the majority of partners, most lack the leadership component.

During the 48 years that I have been retained by partners as a management consultant to assess and make recommendations to improve a firm’s

financial position and its management processes, many mid-level and younger partners have referred to certain senior partners as the “heart and soul” of their firm. It is curious that, in a great many cases, most of these mid-level and younger partners are hard pressed to identify other members of the firm who they perceive as possessing the appropriate leadership component. Below is a list of what the significant majority of the above-mid-level and younger partners said they expect from the leaders of their firms:

Acknowledged trust in the leader’s motivation, fairness, and respect of colleagues:

Demonstrated willingness to subordinate their personal motivation to the benefit of the firm;

Can lead with strength when circumstances dictate change;

An ability to bridge the natural constituent barriers – age, gender, departmental – to achieve successful results;

Clear and convincing business acumen and technical skills to assure leadership;

Leadership… but not dictatorship; An optimistic, realistic vision of the firm; Focus on strategic issues rather than day-

to-day administrative matters; Build relationships with each of the

partners; Possess the instinct to know when to

consult with and secure support of partners;

Build a consensus on key issues prior to presenting initiatives;

Financial knowledge and good business judgment;

Are decisive… but build consensus; Listen to all points of view; Willingness to take prudent risks; Appreciation of firm culture;



23

Maintain confidence; Make themselves accessible; Always have a few minutes to listen; Provide recognition and praise; and Communicate with associates and staff.

It is my opinion that collaboration is the best way to generate ideas and options for leading the firm. In the more professionally and financially successful firms, much gets done by teams of partners pulling together. The firm, not the leader, becomes the star. The leader serves primarily as the one who articulates/recommends the firm’s goals and plans for accomplishing its objectives.

Tips for effective communications Communication is essential for collaboration, and the latter is essential to try to gain proper partner “buy-in” to implement new and innovative initiatives to progress the firm. To insure that the firm’s leaders have enough time to communicate properly with the attorneys, the managing partner should attempt to delegate as much of the day-to-day administrative work as possible to the firm’s director of administration or office administrator. The managing partner should:

Assisted by the management committee, the heads of each office in multi-office firms, and practice group heads, recommend goals and objectives for the firm, each practice group, office, and partner;

Take the time to schedule “warm and fuzzy” lunches with partners in each of the firm’s offices, as appropriate;

Conduct at least annual management retreats attended by members of the management committee, heads of each office, and the heads of each practice group to develop and discuss strategies for progressing the firm;

Make partners’ meetings as productive as possible – Circulate proposed agendas before the meeting, discuss critical topics with the more influential partners, ask partners for input about topics/issues to be discussed, broadcast the results of meeting to partners;

Be very careful when attempting to solve problems by email – Even the best solutions to problems may be misinterpreted when they are sent via email; depending upon the issue to be addressed, it is much better for the managing partner to meet briefly and personally with the partner who has asked the question;

Avoid being chained to your desk – Make the time to walk the halls of your office and make it a point to regularly visit each of the firm’s other offices;

Be mindful of the vocal minority who constantly “revisit” issues because they may not agree with the majority of the partners, thinking that if they belabor the point long enough, the former will wear down the majority who may be willing to concede to the minority to end the discussion;

Conduct appropriate discussions with the more influential partners about initiatives, strategies, and policy issues in advance of the meeting where the subject will be discussed; this will build support for the proposal;

Always obtain critical “buy-in” from the more influential partners before “going out on a limb” about certain questionable initiatives;

Never go into a meeting at which a new policy issue will be discussed without discussing these issues with certain partners prior to the meeting so that he or she will not be surprised by the outcome of the discussion;



24

Pay attention to personal habits – Every move you make as the managing partner will be subject to discussion and interpretation by other partners, including:

How early you arrive at the office; How you relate to attorneys and staff

in the hallway, how you allocate your time;

Whether your billable time is submitted in a timely manner;

How you prepare and conduct yourself at all meetings of partners, associates, and staff;

How attentive you are to following up on your accounts receivables and write-downs and write-offs;

How long it takes for you to respond to partners’ requests etc.;

Attend occasional practice group meetings;

Assisted by the director of administration and/or members of the management committee, heads of offices and practice groups, develop action plans to implement your recommended initiatives before promoting these initiative to the partners;

Establish and announce dates for standing meetings well in advance of the meeting so that partners will enter these dates on their calendars;

“360 degree evaluations”; Ask partners for input for meetings; Circulate meeting agendas at least 48

hours prior to a management committee and partners’ meetings; and

Circulate copies of the minutes of management committee and partners’ meetings at least 48 hours after management committee and partners’ meetings.

Concluding commentsThere are some leadership functions that should be performed by the managing partner or members of the management committee and that should not be delegated. There are other management tasks that may be performed by either the committee or the managing partner, but also may be performed by individual members of the management committee or other lawyers in the firm. These firm leaders should be charged with performing those leadership functions that require their specific talents and energy. In placing responsibility for other tasks, it is important to make certain that they have the time to perform the functions that only they can perform.

In assessing his or her leadership function, the managing partner should realize that today’s attorneys’ expectations regarding the practice of law may well be different from the expectations that attorneys held ten years ago and longer. These expectations may have changed in regard to hours of work, specialization, income, risk, independence, and ethics.

A firm’s leader needs to consider how the social, educational, and economic backgrounds of the new crop of attorneys have changed, and how these changes may be reflected in their attitudes, needs, and expectations. Ultimately, these changes will be reflected in the firm’s recruiting activities, turnover, work product, and fields of specialization.

In the final analysis, the work of the leader is the work that binds and unifies the various components of the firm – that is, the attorneys. The prudent leader will recognize the need to chart a course between the requirements of the practice of law and the needs of those who perform the work.



25

About the authorJoel A. Rose is a certified management consultant and president of Joel A. Rose & Associates Inc., management consultants to law firms based in Cherry Hill, New Jersey. He has extensive experience consulting with private law firms, and performs and directs consulting assignments in law firm management and organization, strategic and financial planning, lawyer compensation, the feasibility of mergers and acquisitions, and the marketing of legal services.

Joel’s articles on law firm management appear in the Philadelphia Legal Intelligencer, The New Jersey Law Journal, The Texas Lawyer, publications of the Association of Legal Administrators, and other state and local bar association journals. He is the principle contributor to Thrive, the blog of the Law Practice Management Committee of the New York State Bar Association. He is also a contributing author of Model Partnership Agreements for New York Law Firms, published by the New York State Bar Association.

Joel is on the board of editors of Accounting and Financial Planning for Law Firms and Law Firm Partnership and Benefits Report. He speaks at national, state, and city bar association meetings and at the Association of Legal Administrators chapter meetings. He is a member of the Law Practice Management Committee of the New York State Bar Association, a member of the Section of Law Practice management of the American Bar Association, and a fellow in the College of Law Practice Management.


27

Leading lights: Lessons in law firm leadership development from GE

By Ava Madon, partner at Penningtons Manches

AS THE differences between Old Law and New Law have become increasingly stark and apparent, the issue of whether law firm leaders are equipped to face the challenges ahead is an important one. The demands on leaders have intensified and changed over recent years, but it’s questionable whether the leadership development processes in place at most law firms have kept pace.

Innovating around the issue of leadership development in a way that produces significant impact can be difficult. One approach is to look at companies in other industries to see what they have to offer by way of ideas and concepts. Taking the leadership development program at General Electric (GE) as an example, this article considers:

1. What companies known for their leadership development do differently;

2. How GE’s culture and processes enable it to develop better leaders; and

3. How to adapt best practice in the corporate world to your law firm.

Leading the wayGE is particularly well known for its ability to develop and leverage strong leadership at all levels. Its CEOs have traditionally been very “hands-on” when it comes to developing leadership talent. Jeff Immelt, the current CEO, sums it up as: “The only way I can run

GE well is if I handpick the top couple of hundred people”.

Far from being a glib statement, accumulating an in-depth knowledge of individuals at varying stages of the leadership track is the foundation of GE’s leadership development program. The box “Leadership development at GE” explains how the formal part of the process works in practice.

Leadership development at GE Reviews (known as “Session Cs”) of

leaders and potential leaders across each business unit are carried out by the senior leadership team at the location of each business unit so that individuals can be observed in context. The Session Cs lead to decisions on matters such as developmental needs, future roles, and retention. The CEO is actively involved.

The style and thoroughness of the sessions are what make Session Cs stand out from the reviews carried out at other companies. Individuals’ core talents and qualities are rigorously examined by combining hard performance facts with observations made by senior leaders. The thoroughness of these discussions also improves leaders’ skills in judging other leaders.



28

Other key aspects of GE’s leadership development system include the following:

1. Consistent and substantive coaching and feedback by leaders at all levels to their more junior colleagues.

2. Tailored quality education. Crotonville is GE’s legendary off-site education center for high potentials and leaders. Training is broad ranging and specifically designed to fit with GE’s strategy, culture, and values.

3. Leaders must develop other leaders in order to progress. This isn’t optional. 80 per cent of the instructors at Crotonville are senior leaders from GE, including the CEO. Most instructors teach once a month, and both instructors and participants evaluate and challenge each other. For example, CEOs have been known to ask participants what they would do differently if they were the CEO.

4. Opportunities for informal social interactions are actively created by senior leaders. These reinforce formal teaching sessions and reviews and enable senior leaders to get to know individuals

better. The interactions are used by senior leaders to feed into a leadership databank of information on junior leaders and high-potential individuals.

Comparing processesAt first glance, it can seem that the types of processes in place at GE and other companies best known for leadership development aren’t that different to those in many other organizations, including law firms. However, the telling difference between the best companies and the rest becomes clear when examining the benefits that they consistently reap (see box: Benefits of the best leadership development programs). Their programs give them a significant competitive edge that others are not able to demonstrate to the same extent, and on the same consistent basis.

Session C reviews are carried out before the yearly strategy sessions for each business unit. This ensures that the right individuals are in place to formulate and implement the strategy for each business. The strategy review is combined with a follow-up on Session C. The operations and budgets review for each business unit take place a couple of months later, which is preceded by a further Session C follow-up.

Benefits of the best leadership development programs

There is a sufficient pipeline of quality leaders to meet the company’s existing and future business needs;

Promotions can be made quickly if a key individual resigns, ensuring stability;

There is a high talent retention rate, as individuals’ careers are carefully planned, and they are offered carefully-chosen on-the-job development opportunities to learn new skills;

Valuable talent isn’t carelessly lost, as additional coaching and mentoring are promptly given to those who have potential, but are struggling;

The organization attracts the best talent due to its reputation for



29

Each company has designed its disciplines and processes to reflect its specific business needs and culture, but they nevertheless stem from the following common themes.

Leadership development starts at the top: The CEOs at the best companies

are almost obsessed with developing strong leadership at all levels of their organization. While they rely on a capable HR department to support the process, the CEO and the senior leadership team drive it.

CEOs and other senior leaders spend substantial amounts of time spotting and developing other leaders, which is backed up by tailored training.

Leadership development is a disciplined process:

Judging and developing an individual’s potential has been converted from a subjective hit-or-miss art into a precise and institutionalized discipline underpinned by in-depth observations and discussions, where viewpoints about individuals are challenged and need to be backed up.

The senior leadership team exhibits the same in-depth knowledge of key individuals’ characteristics and core

talents as they do of their company’s financial statements.

Senior leaders consistently link business results to other leaders’ actions, decisions, and behaviors until their core talents and areas for development become clear and specific.

Linking leadership and rewards: Although rewards are based on

financial performance, they are also linked to how the results are obtained and whether they reflect the values of the company.

Values are made explicit and detailed examples are given so that there is clarity around expected behaviors.

Leaders as teachers: Leaders cannot progress through

the ranks unless they actively and consistently develop others through both formal teaching and informal mentoring and coaching. It’s common for the CEO and other senior leaders to reach down a couple of levels and coach a more junior leader on an ad-hoc basis.

Feedback is recognized as being of paramount importance in developing leaders. It is targeted, constructive and, most importantly, candid.

Providing development opportunities: Using their in-depth knowledge of

more junior leaders, senior leaders ensure that they are given on-the-job opportunities to grow and develop, depending on their skills, developmental needs, and ultimate career ambitions.

Senior leaders are always clear about what an individual is expected to gain from a new opportunity – for example, whether it’s testing to see if a new skill can be acquired or

developing individuals and providing rewarding career paths; and

With the right people in the rights roles, the organization has a better chance than most at adapting quickly, making sound strategic decisions, and implementing them. If the business falters, as even the best can do, it gets back on track quicker than those with poor leadership.



30

increasing an individual’s judgment about people or the business.

An individual is always coached and supported in a new role by a more senior leader, with constant feedback provided.

Lessons for law firmsLaw firms are undoubtedly different to organizations in the corporate world and, when it comes to leadership development, they face specific challenges. However, firms wishing to ensure that their leadership development processes remain fit for purpose may benefit from adapting and applying the themes discussed above.

The extent to which the themes can be adopted will depend heavily on the firm’s existing culture and partnership; the following factors should be considered:

Starting at the topManaging partners have an additional hurdle to contend with when trying to drive through the types of leadership processes and disciplines employed by the best companies. The culture and economic model of law firms necessitates the support of the wider partnership. As a result, although a managing partner with a genuine belief in the importance of leadership development is a prerequisite, he also needs to engender sufficient buy-in from his fellow partners.

This is undoubtedly a key point to consider before embarking on any leadership program that requires genuine change. It is only when the partners are on board that the senior management team are able to adopt the hands-on approach of senior leaders at the best companies.

Analyzing talentSenior leadership teams at law firms

don’t tend to analyze their lawyers, and in particular, their fellow partners, in the same focused manner as GE and the other companies best known for leadership development. There are two main reasons for this:

1. The concept of analyzing and rating fellow partners goes against many partners’ view of what a partnership means. However, with buy-in, this barrier can be minimized. Helpful lessons can be learnt from how GE introduced candor and rigor in analyzing its talent. The behavior changes required were driven from the top, with the-then CEO consistently exhibiting the types of behaviors he required when it came to analyzing and providing feedback to his senior leadership team. This allowed those individuals, in turn, to exhibit the same behaviors when dealing with the next tier of leaders. A cascade effect followed throughout the organization. It goes without saying that this wasn’t an easy process or a quick one, but the end result is enduring.

2. Some of the more senior leadership roles, particularly at larger law firms, are elected, which makes analyzing individuals for these roles irrelevant. While it’s likely that managing partners and senior partners will continue to be elected for the foreseeable future, it’s possible for the senior leadership to persuade their fellow partners to agree to change the way other senior roles are appointed. A prime example of this happening is the recent change at Clifford Chance, allowing the managing partner to personally appoint a number of senior roles which were previously voted on.



31

Rewarding results and behaviorsThere are often a number of criteria that contribute towards how individuals are rewarded. Financial performance will undoubtedly be a prime factor in assessing compensation levels. However, firms that also look at how such performance was achieved are those that will have an advantage in identifying valuable leadership talent.

For example, a partner who grows client revenues by developing and motivating a team to help achieve the revenue growth is more likely to succeed in a formal leadership role than a partner who also grows client revenues but works in lone-ranger mode.

Teaching more than the lawIt’s standard practice for lawyers to hone their legal expertise by learning from more senior lawyers. However, this type of essential mentoring and coaching doesn’t tend to extend to the development of leadership skills. In fact, the thought of one partner developing another can raise hackles.

But it may be time for a change of mindset, as effective leaders shouldn’t expect to lead all the time. As leadership expert Jim Collins notes, “The ability to toggle between leading and following is critical because circumstances change.”

The best companies for leadership put this into practice on a daily basis. For example, at Toyota, no one is allowed to mentor or coach another person unless they themselves are being mentored or coached.

As many law firms become more corporate in nature and appoint different leadership roles, it may well become easier to persuade partners to not only take on a wider “leader and teacher” role, but also to accept mentoring and coaching from other colleagues.

Developing opportunitiesThe increasingly complex structure of many law firms provides an ideal training ground for developing leaders in a variety of leadership roles. It’s implicit that, in order to provide the right development opportunities, senior leaders must have a comprehensive knowledge of leadership talent across the firm. But, in addition, in an environment where much of leadership boils down to persuasion, care needs to be taken to ensure that those given leadership roles have sufficient standing within the partnership to be able to influence their fellow partners as needed.

Other factorsAs well as the common practices of companies with the best leadership, some other factors to be considered when looking at leadership development in law firms are as follows:

Frequent and tailored: Companies at the forefront of leadership development recognize that they frequently need to revisit their processes to ensure that they are up to date.

The old adage of self-help being the best help also resonates strongly with these companies. Rather than buying in a formulaic solution, they work with their internal constituents to develop their own unique, research-based leadership model based on their specific business needs, strategic goals, and culture.

Future trends: While it’s fairly safe to say that law firms probably won’t be at the forefront of leadership innovation, keeping abreast of trends and what other industries are doing can help to ensure processes remain fit for purpose (see box: Future trends in leadership development).



32

Spotlight on leadershipThe challenges that continue to face law firms are by now familiar enough to not need repeating. But, it’s easy to forget that, without consistently strong leadership at all levels, the

chances of successfully dealing with these challenges are much reduced. As a result, reviewing leadership development more proactively and through a broader lens has never been more important.

A version of this article first appeared in Managing Partner magazine in October 2014.

About the authorAva Madon is a partner at Penningtons Manches LLP. She has an MBA in Legal Practice from Nottingham Law School and regularly writes about law firm management issues. She is an accredited business coach and is currently running a pro bono pilot coaching scheme in conjunction with the Law Society’s Women Lawyers Division. The aim is to provide female lawyers at all stages of their careers with access to high quality coaching which might not otherwise be available to them. Ava is also a mentor with the Aspire Foundation, mentoring and coaching individuals at CEO level in the voluntary sector. Ava can be contacted at [email protected].

Reference

1. Adapted from Petrie, N., “Future Trends in

Leadership Development”, Centre for Creative

Leadership, 2014.

Future trends in leadership development1

1. An increase in vertical development, as opposed to concentrating on horizontal development. This is because, in complex, fast moving and often ambiguous environments, leaders need to be taught to think in a much more sophisticated way than previously. Vertical development focuses on increasing an individual’s thinking abilities and cognitive development, whereas horizontal development concentrates on teaching skills, abilities, and behaviors.

2. A shift from leaders being developed to individuals owning and driving their own leadership development. This sits well with the younger generations’ values and expectations and aligns with established motivational theory, which suggests that autonomy increases intrinsic motivation.

3. Collective leadership – this involves a move away from a single “heroic” leader to connected networks that lead through collaboration and sharing information. Again, this fits with younger generations’ ability to communicate and share information easily through social and work networks.


33

By Thomas C. Grella, attorney and immediate past chair of the management committee of McGuire, Wood & Bissette, P.A.

IN 2008 the United States experienced a downturn in the economy often referred to as the financial “crisis”. For some, the following years truly became a crisis. For others, it was an opportunity due to a changing marketplace. As a business lawyer who regularly practices in the area of transactions and real estate development law, I witnessed some of my clients making the decision to “hunker down for the foreseeable future”, while others examined the marketplace, made changes to operations, and cautiously sought out new areas of work. I found that these were also two common reactions for lawyers and law firms, as some anticipated less work in traditional areas by cutting back and making a reduction of head count, while others responded by seeking work from areas of practice burgeoning due to the recession.

Over 12 years as leader of my own law firm, I have witnessed and experienced times of uncertainty, referred to by some as “crisis”, and by others as “change”. In a law firm right down the street from my own firm, the strongest leader and manager of the firm recently died unexpectedly from a sudden heart attack while he was out hunting. Certainly, for a firm that had not planned for this possibility, this could be perceived as a crisis, or at least a time of great uncertainty for the future. In my own firm, in the last years of my tenure as managing partner,

I had three partners and one associate leave on the same day for a larger law firm that had recently moved into the area – apparently enticed by a temporary “greener pasture” that only a large firm can offer, with our chief operating officer leaving one month later for greater opportunity and personal growth at a larger firm in a larger city. My initial reaction was certainly to wonder whether our firm would weather the storm of what I perceived as a “crisis”.

I have come to believe, however, that many events in the life of a law firm that are characterized as “crisis” are really just times of change or uncertainty, and almost always opportunities for greater life experience and growth, both for the law firm as an organization, as well as personally for each member, staff, and attorney in it. I distinctly remember the moment when our most senior partner came into my office to discuss the crisis I perceived when those four lawyers left. Fortunately, as a leader, I was surrounded by a few very wise mentors who helped me greatly in my leadership. My initial reaction was to focus on the difficulty of the present dilemma. Fortunately, sage counsel and advice turned our discussion from the doom and gloom of crisis to the opportunity of positive change and growth that we might have before us if we handled the experience well.

Through the following months and years, I came to realize that there are a few points to consider in a time of change and uncertainty – points that are important to

Leading a law firm through crisis, change, or uncertainty



34

both me personally, and to the firm and its members:

1. That my personal priorities are properly focused;

2. That I clearly communicate to others in the law firm that we have a sound organizational purpose;

3. That we are flexible and are willing to change plans to achieve success if necessary; and

4. That the leadership of the firm truly cares about its people, meaning every other member of the firm – attorney and staff alike – as well as all of its valued and loyal clients.

Priorities – Examining your personal priorities as a leaderIn my book, Lessons in Leadership: Essential Strategies for Lawyers,1 I mention that there are two types of priorities that are crucial for a leader to consider in a time of crisis, change, or uncertainty: attitude and action. The attitude of a leader needs to be, and remain, strong and courageous; and all actions taken need to be firm, fair, and focused on the future.

AttitudeIn tough times, followers thirst for strong and courageous leadership. This may seem obvious, but these terms, “strong and courageous”, don’t always mean what followers think they mean.

First, and seemingly counterintuitive to strength and courage, a leader must humble himself in the sight of others (everyone else in the law firm, and its clients – those being led). The word “humble” does not seem to apply to, or mix well with, attorneys. Perhaps that is a gross over-generalization. Humility, however, is about realizing who you are, and understanding the limits of

your strengths, and the power of your weaknesses. Understanding these truths in a difficult situation will bring humility. It is about understanding your need for, and dependency on, other members of the law firm. There is truly no place for pride in times of trouble.

Secondly, a leader of a law firm experiencing tough and challenging times must know how to handle the feelings of fear that are naturally going to come his or her way. Leaders need to learn the lesson of Nelson Mandela who stated:

“I learned that courage was not the absence of fear, but the triumph over it…The brave man is not he who does not feel afraid, but he who conquers that fear.”2

Thirdly, being a strong and courageous leader means having an “attitude of gratitude”, and acknowledging the real opportunity for growth through the tough times being experienced. In some cases, the crisis may itself be a blessing to the firm. “Blessings” are happenings that shape a leader’s character, things that may hurt now, but actually are positive experiences which may lead to future success.

ActionGiven the likelihood of change (not to mention those unique and untimely, but probably not expected, challenges that might come the way of a law firm and its members) and the speed with which it comes and affects the way we do business, every leader of a law firm or legal organization must be prepared for action. These are a few points you might consider:

Have a planIt is impossible for a law firm to have a plan for every possible crisis, change, or period of uncertainty that might come its way. Only a fortune teller could do so. At the same



35

time, there are certain types of disasters or crises that are so common that it would be negligent for a law firm leader not to plan on the ways the firm could and should respond to these kinds of events. The type of difficult times that might arise include natural disasters (floods, hurricanes, earthquake, etc.), departure or death of a significant lawyer or lawyers from the firm (such as a whole practice group leaving, or a significant rainmaker dying suddenly), or technology failures – to mention just a few.

A law firm leadership team should have a plan to respond to any crisis that is reasonably foreseeable. This plan will ideally include basic procedures and policies addressing what actions will need to be considered and undertaken – and who in the firm will do them – as regards those vital functions necessary to continue firm operations. A leader should openly discuss these policies and procedures with all members of the firm, both attorneys and staff, and reinforce the general principle that there must be a uniform front against difficult challenges that face the firm. Further, a solid crisis plan should not be kept secret from clients. Clients need to know that their valuable information and property will be kept safe by their lawyer, and that a plan is in place to do so in the most difficult of times. The greater the degree of buy-in to the process by firm stakeholders, the more likely it will be that the team will stay together – and the leader will be able to lead – when difficult times do actually arise.

Be the calm in the stormIn any crisis, there is a tendency for organization members to react emotionally: to act before appropriate contemplation of a proper and effective response. The job of the leader is to be level-headed, thoughtful, and considerate. The leader not only needs

to keep cool, but needs to make sure others do not react without appropriate thought about the repercussions of their actions, or overreactions. Composure in a leader necessitates self-control and thoughtfulness. A calm and collected manner, which includes a logical and well-thought-out response to any scenario, will go a long way to solidify respect from followers: the type which results in a willingness of followers to allow the person with the position to lead.

Fair in action, with a focus on firm firstIn times of crisis or uncertainty, there may be an “other side”: someone or some group which has wronged the firm, or is causing the firm some challenge or distress. Human nature begs for retribution or punishment. It is a leader’s challenge to not only resist temptation to react in that manner, but to take steps to help others to do so as well. How the leader responds will not only be observed by the perceived “bad guys”, but also by every member of the firm, as well as clients. All firm members will want to see and believe that those in leadership positions in the firm will be fair, perhaps imagining themselves in the same or a similar situation in the future. Further, stakeholders of the law firm will want to know that leaders will act with a “firm first” focus, with the highest priority being the long-term viability and success of the organization.

Seek out the opportunityA few years ago, a famous politician made a comment that a leader must not miss the opportunity in any crisis. Certainly, crisis and uncertainty is not something that you as a leader would actively seek, but it is important to understand that in these times of constant change and uncertainty, leadership action should be taken with the understanding that there is much truth in the statement made by



36

this politician. Every law firm crisis should be seen by its leader as an opportunity for team collaboration, achievement, and success. These times are usually an opportunity for a firm, practice group, or other team of professionals to break down the walls that divide them, and perhaps dissolve silos within the firm that might be causing unrest or unhealthy forms of competition or conflict.

Purpose – Reinforcing that the firm mission and vision is soundOver many years of experience in leading my firm, including times of great uncertainty and change (in the world, the profession, and my own law firm), I have learned that a highly important activity for a leader in such times is to firmly reinforce the firm’s mission and vision to all stakeholders. I am not talking about simply republishing the firm’s existing strategic plan, or reminding members of its existence on the firm intranet.

According to Harvard professor and leadership expert Rosabeth Moss Kanter: “A wise person… said we, you know, should remember to start every meeting by reminding ourselves of our mission; reminding ourselves of what we stand for. And you know that lifts the spirits like nothing else. There’s a purpose, there’s a reason why we are doing this.”3 What I am suggesting is a rallying of the troops. If a natural disaster were to strike, like a hurricane; if a significant fee generator leaves; if the founder, and significant rainmaker of the firm, were to drop dead of a heart attack; a leader needs to gather together those in the firm and review the mission and vision of the firm, discussing why the firm must continue to exist, and what “we” are collectively trying to do by remaining in business.

It is a great idea to allow attorneys and staff to openly discuss questions focusing on why the law firm exists as an organization.

If the firm was not in existence, but firm founders had to again decide whether to start all over again, and considering present difficulties, would they do it? Sure they would! And, at the time, the founders of a law firm could not reasonably have expected that there would be no hard times to deal with. Perhaps they could not have anticipated the present reality; however, at that time, they certainly had some uncertainty of their own to deal with. For my own time of uncertainty, when four members left on one day, I was able to show to all of the members of the firm that this was not such a crisis as they might have perceived it to be, because we had a reason for existing as a firm, and that reason remained sound.

Plans – Encouraging flexibility in strategies and tacticsOver years of having to deal with uncertainty and challenge, I have learned the valuable lesson of flexibility. Even though the firm still has a reason to exist, and a sound mission and vision, a law firm leader needs to be flexible regarding the goals and objectives in the short term, as well as strategies and tactics to achieve its mission and vision. In the words of leadership speaker Peter Docker, a true expert in leading through crisis (including the challenge of leading an airline crew of an in-flight jumbo jet when there was a failure of the landing gear to open during the landing sequence): “Sometimes there are procedures that don’t fit. You need to be open to being flexible and adaptable… to the situation”.4

Many law firm leaders will have been quite instrumental in the development of the existing firm strategic plan, so there may be some natural internal resistance to tinkering with implementation of a document that was drafted through such a long and arduous process. It is critical that leaders resist the



37

urge to be inflexible, however. In dealing with my own firm’s time of uncertainty and challenge, as an example, we had a strategic plan that included short-term hiring, financial goals, and other specifically timed tactics. Many of our specific strategies to get us to the place where we wanted to be long term (per the strategic plan) had to be revamped, and a few had to be totally scrapped. A leader in times of uncertainty or crisis needs to be flexible, not only in delaying or cancelling tactics, but they need to be innovative enough to come up with an alternate plan to achieve the firm’s mission and purpose. In my case, I had to show that, given the present reality, I had a revised proposal of strategies and tactics for stakeholders to consider: ones which still achieved the organizational mission and purpose, but which fitted with what the firm leadership now believed was best for future success, considering present challenges.

People – Providing support and reassurance to stakeholders During difficult times, many law firm leaders have the natural tendency to communicate less with firm stakeholders. For lawyers, it is likely worse because we tend to be overly concerned with legalities. For instance, if the crisis were to involve the departure of a number of attorneys, lawyers ask: how will we deal with them as it regards possession of client files? What monies are they entitled to? How do we get them out of our facilities as soon as possible? What can we legally tell our staff? What should we keep quiet about from an “employment law” standpoint? In any event, uncertainty among the masses breeds suspicion. In many cases there is nothing of true substance that you can say at first. The people who work for you in the law firm, however, do not only want information – they want reassurance. They don’t want

to just read emails when you finally have something to tell them, but they desire some immediate reassurance and comfort from those they recognize as being “at the top”.

Napoleon is credited with saying, “The leader’s role is to describe reality, and give hope.” Regardless of the challenges, this truly is the job of the law firm leader dealing with change, uncertainty, or crisis. This means conducting meetings with partners, all lawyers, and staff. It is a great idea for a law firm leader to become an integral part of staff meetings, regardless of whether the firm faces difficulty or uncertainty. However, in these times, a leader needs to over-communicate and give assurance. Rudy Giuliani, in describing organizational communication in crisis, stated: “A big part of leadership is consistency – letting those who work for you and others you lead know that you’ll be there for them through good times and bad.”5 During the 2008 financial crisis, it was important for law firm leaders to communicate to young lawyers and staff that the firm and its leadership was committed to them, and that reduction of head count was only a last resort. They needed to hear that leadership sacrificed first, before asking others to do the same. In a different type of crisis, such as when a significant number of partners leave for a competing firm, they needed to know the firm is not falling apart, that leadership is nimble and will be coming forward with a plan that will not only protect their jobs in the short run, but result in long-term success.

About the authorTom Grella is immediate past chair of the management committee of McGuire, Wood & Bissette, P.A. in Asheville, North Carolina. He remains a member of the management committee.



38

Tom has a JD from Wake Forest University Law School of Winston-Salem, NC and has been licensed as an attorney in North Carolina since 1985. He is a past chair of the ABA Law Practice Management Section (now Law Practice Division), and presently sits on its executive committee. Grella has served in many positions within the ABA Law Practice Division, including being a member of its council, chair of its core groups, a member of its publications board and chair of its diversity committee.

Grella co-authored The Lawyer’s Guide to Strategic Planning in 2005, and is author of Lessons in Leadership: Essential Skills for Lawyers (2013), both publications of the ABA Law Practice Division. He is currently a division delegate serving his third three-year term in the ABA House of Delegates, and is a past chair of its technology and communications committee. He is currently on the Law Practice Magazine board, serves as columns editor, and is author of the “Managing” column.

Tom was the 2012 recipient of the Sam Smith Award, presented annually by the ABA Law Practice Management Section to an individual who has demonstrated excellence in law practice management. He is also a fellow of the College of Law Practice Management, a fellow of the National Institute for the Teaching of Ethics and Professionalism, and a fellow of the American Bar Foundation. North Carolina Lawyers Weekly awarded Grella with a 2014 “Leaders in the Law” award.

Tom’s leadership blog is found at www.tomgrella.com. Grella is a member of the Corporate Practice Group of his law firm.

References

1. Grella,T., Lessons in Leadership: Essential

Strategies for Lawyers, ABA Publishing,

Chicago, 2013.

2. Brown, G., Courage, Weinstein Books, New

York, 2008.

3. Quoting Rosabeth Moss Kanter in a TedX

Beacon Street presentation, “Six Keys to

Leading Positive Change”, 7 January 2013.

4. Quoting Peter Docker speaking on crew

resource management at the Crisis Leadership

Forum, 7 February 2012. Coventry University:

“Crew Resource Management and the Art of

Followership”.

5. Giuliani, R., Leadership, Hyperion, New York,

2002.


39

By Jo Larbie, consultant with Redstone Consultants

IT IS a well-known fact that leading and managing within a professional services firm can be a thankless responsibility; these roles are often ill-defined and it can be tough keeping outspoken partners in line. This article explains how to succeed in this challenging environment by building a focused and supportive leadership team that will deliver your firm’s goals while making managing directors and managing partners look good.

Taking on the role of managing partner can be a challenge; you have to deal with other partners who, despite the fact that very few have any formal leadership and management development skills, believe that they know how to run the firm. Partners are, by definition, skilled and autonomous individuals who expect the exercise of authority to occur through a process of influence and negotiation, rather than through reliance on more direct, position-based authority. The other hurdle is that managing partners frequently lack a clear mandate from the partnership, with the result that their remit is only defined when they begin (or try) to implement decisions.

Few managing partners, practice group leaders, or members of their team receive any leadership and management training for running a business. And the higher up you go in many law firms, the less leadership

and management development you receive – where it is provided, it is often limited in scope.

If you have made it to a managing partner or practice or division leader position, it is usually on the basis of excellent personal performance, coupled with an ability to generate high fees and lead a team of like-minded professionals. The ultimate goal of this position, however, is to build the current and long-term value of the firm. To achieve this, you need a great team behind you who believe in you and your objectives.

Agree and communicate your visionYou must invest time at the outset to define the team’s purpose to ensure everyone’s vision is aligned. Your primary task is to run the business and build the long-term value of your firm. To do this, you need to agree the leadership team’s core responsibilities, which should include:

Setting and communicating a vision for the firm that engages all stakeholders;

Creating a strategic plan to deliver the vision;

Obtaining and managing the required resources;

Making decisions that influence the firm’s ability to achieve its vision;

Creating an environment in which people are self-motivated and willing to go the extra mile; and

Managing and minimizing risks.

Unified front: Tips for building strong leadership teams


40


Once you have agreed your vision for the firm, articulate and communicate it to the partners. Creating and communicating a compelling and shared vision is an immensely powerful way to engage and motivate people, particularly in tough times.

Your vision needs to be both realistic and attainable if you want people to sign up to it, follow your lead, and do what’s required to achieve it – this should be more than a strapline or statement. Your vision should:

State your strategic intent; Define and offer a compelling and

motivating picture of the future and provide a purpose for those working in your firm;

Make clear the end goal; Create alignment within your firm; Act as a decision-making guide; and Inspire and motivate people to do what

is needed to achieve it.

To understand whether this vision is embedded in your firm, think about the following questions:

When was the last time your leadership team spent time reviewing, discussing and agreeing your vision for the firm?

Are your partners aligned to your vision? Can everyone in your firm (from the post

room to all members of the leadership team) articulate the vision of the firm and their respective roles in its delivery?

Above all, as a leadership team you should be passionate about your firm, your clients, and the future, and excite your people about the career opportunities available to them.

Obtain partner buy-in to the firm’s goals and objectivesObtaining partner buy-in to the firm’s goals

and objectives is one of the managing partner’s key tasks. Within a law firm, it is the individual behaviors of partners on the ground that define the firm’s strategy and culture; and unless there is substantial buy-in from partners to the firm’s goals and objectives, no amount of management will achieve them. Whichever way you look at it, influencing whether directly or through peer pressure is the only way to achieve results in a law firm. It is important to get to know your firm and partners from the beginning to ensure that you understand their interests and what they want.

To succeed in achieving your goals, you have to build a critical mass of support for your initiatives. Powerful individuals and groups must see that it is in their interest to support and help you to realize your goals and objectives for the firm – ignore the politics of the firm at your peril. Political networks – informal bonds of solidarity among individuals and groups – can organize either to resist change or get things done. Building and maintaining partner consensus requires constant vigilance by the management board – this is one of the management board’s key responsibilities.

The starting point for getting key partners on board is to define, as precisely as possible, the specific goals and objectives the management board wants to deliver. Clarity is important – it is difficult to obtain support if your goals and objectives are unclear. Once you have defined your goals and objectives, you can identify key players, map the influence networks (i.e. who is likely to support and oppose you), and design your strategy. Some managing partners would describe this approach as Machiavellian; however, unless you learn to skillfully influence your key partners, making decisions can be a prolonged and painful process.



41

In times of change or new initiatives, some partners may support your agenda early on because it coincides with their individual interests. At the same time, some key players will oppose your efforts whatever you do. Because influencing and persuasion can use up valuable time and emotional energy, it is essential to assess early on who can be influenced and to direct your efforts accordingly. Do not waste time on those who are irrevocably opposed to your efforts – be pragmatic and move on.

Leaders and managersIn law firms, managing partners and practice heads are leader-managers. Leadership creates the vision and management is focused on the execution of that strategy, using processes, tools, and information to ensure the performance of the busienss meets that defined strategy. Leadership and management are both needed.

The key components of a leader’s role are to:

Inspire – Motivating, leading by example, linking achievement with reward;

Empower – Explaining the delegation of authority, increasing the desire for more responsibility, and relinquishing control without chaos; and

Create – Delivering today as part of creating tomorrow, focusing on the big picture, driving change, and reinforcing positive behavior.

The key components of a manager’s role are to:

Inform – Clarifying expectations and explaining the vision, strategy, and context;

Interact – Sharing information, discussing issues, understanding, and empathizing; and

Solve – Solving and acting as an enabler or escalation point for problems while learning from these problems.

Thinking “big picture” is worthless without the follow-through required to make it happen. Ultimately, what matters is implementation and delivering results.

Becoming an effective leadership teamAre you really a team, or just a group of individuals who meet once a month? To function as a team, you must focus on how the collective performance, and that of individuals, works to deliver goals and objectives, not just on the goals themselves.

Nothing wastes time and undermines a leadership team more than a failing to understand the importance of collective responsibility and accountability. As the leadership team, you represent and act on behalf of the whole firm and, of the many hats you wear, representing your own interests is not one of them. Your leadership team is highly visible – one or two members commenting on board matters outside of a meeting may send negative messages internally and externally.

Acting as a team, accepting collective responsibility for decisions (both inside and outside of board meetings) is vital for stability internally and externally. As a leadership team, you must agree that, once an issue has been thoroughly discussed and a decision made, it should be honored and respected.

Collective decisions must be fully supported by all board members, regardless of their attendance at a specific meeting, or personal view. “Leaking” of sensitive information or evidence, or an unwillingness to tackle difficult issues, should not be tolerated. A decision ratified by the board must be unanimously executed.



42

All members of the leadership team must share responsibility for influencing key partners and stakeholders. This should not be the sole responsibility of the managing partner or practice group leader. Your partners will soon get the message that you are a united leadership team, and may even stop second-guessing your decisions!

Productive meetingsIt is a good idea to regularly review (every three or four months) what the leadership team is actually spending its time discussing during meetings. How “strategic” are the items on your agenda? Are you spending too much time on urgent, short-term issues rather than focusing on the important, but more difficult, initiatives that will make a difference in the long term? Your agenda should contain no more than six items which are important to the firm’s future.

Understand your firm’s businessHow can you take informed decisions if you only understand a part of your firm’s business? To be a credible leader, you need to understand all aspects of its business.

Leading a firm requires very different sets of skills. It is not enough to only know how things operate in your area of expertise; you must understand how all the parts of the business work, its positive attributes, and the issues and challenges ahead. Make this one of your first priorities, because what you learn about the business will determine your own focus.

As it’s rare in the early days of leading a firm to possess an in-depth understanding of its problems and potential, until you do, it’s best to avoid appearing to have all “the answers”. Make a wrong decision at this stage and you may lose some of the support that you will need to make further changes.

The following questions will help you understand your level of knowledge about your firm:

1. When was the last time that you reviewed your firm’s services?

2. Do you regularly assess and review your firm’s mix of services to identify weaknesses, gaps, and spot opportunities for new services?

3. When was the last time you conducted a thorough review of your firm’s client base?

4. Do you have a process for capturing and selecting the best ideas and taking them to market?

5. Does the firm have a formal, consistent client feedback program? How are the results shared? Are problems tackled as a matter of urgency?

Communicate!You cannot communicate too much, particularly in times of uncertainty. If you do not tell your people what’s happening, or why you are doing things and making changes, they will fill the vacuum themselves.

To be an effective leader you need to stay in touch with what is going on across the firm. Do not just rely on what others tell you; get out there, find out and hear it for yourself. Listening is just as important – when you invite people to tell you what they think, really listening to what they have to say demonstrates that you want to know. However, don’t feel that you should have all the answers there and then – don’t respond definitively until you are sure it’s the correct approach.

Invest in your personal developmentRecognize and accept that being a leader may require entirely new skills, attributes, and attitudes, and make time to learn what you need to know to be successful. Working



43

with a business coach can accelerate your leadership and management skills. It can also provide a “safe” environment to test ideas your thinking and ideas. Find an external experienced mentor or join a managing partners’, or directors’ forum for mutual development and support.

Add valueThe words “adding value” are often overused; however, this exactly what is needed from those who lead and manage law firms today. What are you doing, or planning to do, to build the firm’s capabilities and enhance your competitiveness? How will you leave your firm in better shape?

Highly effective practice heads can add great value to the firm through their leadership and stewardship. A good leader will help develop and implement a department/group strategy, acquire and integrate laterals, increase profits, lead the department’s efforts to develop new business, cross-sell other departments, develop its legal professionals, grow the firm’s market share and reputation in the marketplace, and increase the firm’s competitive position. Partners serving as practice leaders can add value through their own efforts, as well as inspiring valuable contributions from others in their department.

For partners who are approaching retirement, the leadership team should put in place structured succession planning for those clients with whom they have strong relationships and where there is significant future business potential.

If you are up for the challenge, becoming a managing partner can be a hugely rewarding position, perfect for those who possess a combination of business acumen and people skills.

Leadership roles within law firms allow those involved to have a real say in the

running of the firm; just make sure that your vision is a shared one, supported and assisted in its implementation by a team that are on-side.

A version of this article first appeared in Managing Partner magazine in March 2013.

About the authorJo Larbie has worked with international professional services firms for over 20 years, specializing in advising business leaders and boards on addressing their strategic people issues – organizational development and talent management – providing solutions that raise business performance and profitability. In her book, How to Make Partner and Still Have a Life (Kogan Page, 2012), she draws on her extensive professional and personal experience as a lawyer, business consultant, academic, and senior international executive in global firms. Jo’s strategic and commercial understanding of the professional services sector informs every aspect of her work.

Jo has held senior leadership positions in talent management, including as national head of people development for leading international professional service firms, such as Andersen’s, BDO LLP, Eversheds, DLA Piper, and as HRD director at a London-based law firm. As well as being an accredited executive coach, Jo is also a certified practitioner in the art of Neuro-Linguistic Programming. She is an affiliate of the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, and a member of the SHRM.

Jo can be contacted at: [email protected].


45

Lisa A. Borsook, executive partner, and Gabriella O’Rourke, director of business development at WeirFoulds LLP

The business of practicing lawUnderstanding the business of practicing law is a fundamental building block to achieving success at a law firm, for men and women, for associates and partners. Understanding how a particular firm achieves, sustains, and improves its profitability is critical for any aspiring law firm leader. When you put aside the elements that distinguish one law firm from another (size, the number of offices, the range of the services offered to clients, etc.), most contemporary firms operate on the premise that they must exchange the expertise and time of their professionals for a return that exceeds the costs associated with operating the firm, including recruitment, retention, training, quality control, infrastructure, marketing, business development, and other related expenses. In today’s economy, successful leadership of a law firm requires that we secure this return in circumstances in which our client base is evermore discriminating and cost conscious.

For any woman aspiring to leadership in a law firm, she must not only understand this fundamental business reality, but she must also understand that the fastest way to achieve power and influence is still through financial performance. Being excellent at interpreting and applying the law is expected

of any lawyer – the baseline for admission, if you will. But being able to retain and win business – these are the building blocks of leadership credibility.

A team-based model of performanceThe correlation between “making rain” and achieving a leadership position in a law firm is well established. But among the changes that are impacting modern law firms, and correspondingly impacting the role of women in law today, is the recognition that financial performance is no longer an individual sport. The way to achieve profitable and sustainable relationships with our clients is evolving as we see a shift away from an emphasis on individual performance to more of a team-based model, one which incorporates collaboration, multi-dimensional services, and joint problem-solving – all attributes where women are particularly strong. This shift bodes well for the advancement of women into leadership roles, if appropriate recognition for these qualities is given. There is ample evidence that, as the world changes and we interact more and more with one another, the competencies that women bring to the table – our ability to forge working relationships, our strengths in teams, our creativity at problem solving, our emotional intelligence, our talents at people development – these are competencies that every firm is going to need to succeed now and in the future.

The pathway to law firm partnership and management: A woman’s perspective


46


The client influence – Diversity as a business imperativeWe are also seeing a notable shift in the influence of our clients’ views on how we practice. As in-house law departments grow and are staffed with sophisticated legal counsel who are finely tuned to the needs of their business employers, they are demanding a different kind of relationship with their external firms. For instance, clients are increasingly considering diversity when selecting outside counsel. A 2012 online poll by the Association of Corporate Counsel found that over 50 percent of in-house counsel consider a firm’s diversity policy when retaining outside lawyers. They are looking to work with law firms where the leadership roster reflects the make-up and intrinsic values of their own departments. And as more and more women are choosing to become in-house counsel, and to assume other corporate leadership roles, they are quickly becoming key decision makers and critical influencers in the future success of the lawyers who serve them.

While the circumstances of practicing law and attaining leadership may be gradually shifting to a more inclusive and diverse environment, it is still incumbent on all of us to find ways to encourage and empower all of our new and aspiring leaders to achieve their full potential. Let’s take a look at some of the facts of law firm leadership from a woman’s perspective for just a moment:

In the United States, women comprise approximately 17 percent of the equity partners in law firms and that percentage has not changed significantly in the last 20 years.

In Ontario, Canada, where I practice, women account for more than 50 percent of Ontario law graduates – but

this is still not reflected in private practice where women account for less than 35 percent of lawyers and only about 20 percent of all partners in law firms.

It is clear from these statistics that gender imbalance in law firms is not a problem that is solving itself as quickly as might be necessary in order to retain the loyalty and continued support of an increasingly diverse and influential client base. Taking into consideration the fact that barely 4 percent of managing partners at law firms are women, it is clear that law firms need to address the institutional barriers that are limiting the advancement of women to leadership roles.

Removing gender biasWe cannot continue to rely on women alone to resolve the gender imbalance issue. It is also true that the solution is not to find ways to “fix” women so that we can succeed in the existing work environment. Women’s networks, work-life balance policies, business development training – these are great initiatives, but not solutions. The solution is, in my view, two-fold: firstly, we need equal representation of women in management, advocating for change; and secondly, and this is especially true so long as there is no equal representation of women in management, we need men to participate in the process.

Men need to have clear discussions with their women associates and partners about the challenges they face. They need to understand that these challenges do not undercut women’s commitment to work, but they do undercut their ability to achieve all of their professional objectives, and that can be demoralizing. There needs to be change in the most fundamental aspects of the existing environment – a recognition that having



47

more women in each law firm represents a strategic business advantage, and that we need to find new ways to encourage and empower the advancement of women.

We also need to recognize and abolish the bias in the way men and women are promoted to positions of leadership. Men are often singled out for promotion based on their talent and potential, while women more often are expected to prove their accomplishments in advance of a promotion. Law firm leaders continue to recognize the potential they see in men and trust that it will be converted into accomplishment, perhaps because it is familiar; they see men adopting similar approaches to their own when it comes to developing a career path. Firms must address this institutional barrier by actively working against it. They must put in place mechanisms to ensure that their talented female lawyers receive adequate coaching, support, and active sponsorship from those who are ultimately in a position to ensure their advancement on an equal footing with their male colleagues.

Firms must also recognize that women don’t take ownership of their successes the way that men do. Women are less likely to reach for the brass ring or shine a spotlight on their accomplishments. They are much more likely to highlight their defects than their male counterparts. Women are more frequently the subject of negative feedback based on their appearance or personality characteristics, rather than their actual work achievements. And, of course, a lot of people think that little children and big jobs don’t mix well. While, in my view, nothing makes women better qualified and better trained for practicing law than raising children – teaching us to prioritize, not to sweat the small stuff, to seek balance, and, perhaps most importantly, giving us conflict resolution skills that make us better at our

jobs – having children is routinely a reason why women are passed over for plum assignments. It may be paternalistic; it may be patronizing; it may be unconscious. But regardless, there is no question that women are looked at differently once they have children. Our commitment to the profession is questioned. In my view, the real reason why women leave the profession so much more frequently than men is not because they have had children, but because their having had children has meant that they are suddenly working in a less hospitable environment. These are the sort of biases that need to be challenged and changed.

Business development and the compensation equationThere are fundamental differences between the way that men and women cultivate business relationships. Female business relationships are often more relationship-based, with less focus on the short term and more focus on the long term and on the slow-burn nature of a mutually beneficial relationship. While this might not lead to the same dramatic “big ticket” wins of their male counterparts in highly transactional areas of practice such as M&A and high-stakes litigation, the female business relationship may prove to be more sustainable and therefore more profitable for the overall practice of a law firm.

It goes without saying that compensation models need to recognize the value of these different approaches. And, in support of those differences, we must take into consideration that women don’t build their practices the same way as men. Whatever those initiatives might be, they are, in my experience, less likely to involve golf and bars. Relationships are more often developed and maintained through shared leisurely activities, finding ways to


48


get to know others and develop trust and credibility with them. Women are more likely to achieve professional success by joining professional organizations and associations, attending events, registering for seminars and conferences – these are often the cornerstones of business development initiatives proposed by women.

Mentoring and sponsorshipThe best way to build the leaders of the future is undoubtedly through mentorship and sponsorship relationships. Each lawyer wants to get the same thing out of his or her work experience – to get important work, client contact, representation in leadership, business development opportunities, proper compensation including credit for the business that you originate, a fair shot at client opportunities, and evaluations that are free from bias. The best way to ensure that each lawyer has the opportunity to get all those things is to make sure that each lawyer has a mentor and/or a sponsor. Ideally, a mentor should not be someone to whom the lawyer reports directly, but it does need to be someone who is sufficiently familiar with the lawyer’s work to be able to provide meaningful input. And for women to succeed in private practice, I would recommend that the mentor be a man – but it must be a man who understands gender-related issues. I say a man because, in most firms, men hold far more power and influence, and in mentor and sponsor relationships they can perhaps provide far more career advantages. In addition, same-sex work relationships probably reinforce unconscious gender biases that block women’s progress.

The mentor is someone who can provide meaningful feedback. Women tend to believe that what other people think matters a lot. As a result, they are often held back by

fear of criticism, because they, in some way or another, find that criticism mirrors their own highly critical views of themselves. So, as a starting point, it would be great if women could learn to look at the best in themselves – and find mentors who do the same – so they can get past the criticism, focus on what they really need to improve on in their job performance, and get ahead.

It is equally important to find a sponsor. A sponsor is someone who champions a lawyer for partnership, client opportunities, higher compensation, leadership, and entry into networks of influential business and community contacts. It is someone who will not just recommend a lawyer in circumstances in which that lawyer will benefit, but also someone who will advocate on that lawyer’s behalf to ensure the lawyer is getting the appropriate attention. It is likely to be someone with whom the lawyer works closely (and it may be a client). It is fundamental that the sponsor be someone who is credible. In some firms, it is fundamental that women be sponsored by men, and that of course means that all women and men need to address the issues that underlie unconscious bias – concerns about career ambitions, worries that something they say or do may lead to misunderstandings or claims of impropriety, office gossip and the like. As an aside, in my experience, the most successful lawyers are those with partners at home who understand the work that they do, and who are mentors and sponsors to them as well.

Essential qualities of leadershipFinally, while finding a mentor and sponsor are important to moving into partnership and leadership positions, to be credible, there are some qualities that good leaders have that I think are particularly important, regardless of gender. All good leaders



49

need to understand the difference between leading and managing a law firm. The latter involves, mostly, fixing problems. The former is much more complicated. And to be a true leader you are going to have to learn how to prioritize and delegate responsibly. There is a lot to be said for learning how to compartmentalize as well. A really good leader is also on a perpetual learning curve. A leader needs to stay connected to what is going on around her, not just in their immediate environment of the law firm, but in the larger, business environment as well. It is fundamental that a leader read about the changes that are impacting the profession and develop a point of view about how evolutions in law will affect the firm, its business, and its clients. Understanding what your clients might expect of you, both today and in the future, is invaluable. More than that, imagining the future is vital if you one day aspire to lead your firm there.

About the authorsLisa Borsook is currently the executive partner of WeirFoulds LLP, a Toronto law firm recognized as one of the top ten law firms in Ontario. She was the firm’s managing partner from 2007 to 2012, making her one of only a few women to have served as managing partner of a law firm in Canada.

Lisa is the chairperson of the firm’s commercial leasing practice group and a member of the business law practice group. She has been recognized as a leading practitioner by Lexpert® and named one of the best lawyers in her practice area by The Best Lawyers® in Canada since 2006. Lisa has also been recognized as a leading practitioner in the 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 editions of Lexpert®/American Lawyer Media Guide to the Leading 500 Lawyers in Canada. She is a frequent writer and speaker on the retention of women in the

legal profession. She was a member of the steering committee for the Law Society’s Retention of Women in Private Practice Working Group, which launched the Justicia Project in 2008 and she represents the firm as a member of the Law Firm Diversity and Inclusion Network.

In 2014, Lisa was honoured with the Award of Excellence in Real Estate by the Ontario Bar Association, given to only one outstanding lawyer each year, and she has been selected as one of WXN’s “Top 100 Most Powerful Women in Canada” in 2013 and 2014, for making a distinct and describable difference to the advancement of women in the Canadian workplace.

Gabriella O’Rourke is currently the director of business development of WeirFoulds LLP, a downtown Toronto law firm recognized as one of the top ten law firms in Ontario. Gabriella oversees the strategic direction of the firm’s marketing and business development activities and provides mentorship and coaching to the firm’s lawyers and senior staff members. Gabriella is a committed relationship builder, blogger, speaker, and guest columnist for national publications, where she provides insights on topics such as winning business, networking, and building your professional profile.


51

By Ian Paterson, partner, and Steve Knight, partner, Performance Consultants LLP

MUCH HAS been written about the changing environment in which law firms are operating, and which is having a seismic impact on them. The environment has changed for good since the global recession and yet we hear many partners talking about “the good old days” and waiting for a return to a time when there was more work than they could cope with.

While many law firms are indeed very successful and volumes have increased, the structural changes in the external environment mean that margins are smaller and profits are under pressure like never before. Clients want more for less, the number of competitors is increasing (in the UK we have seen the major accountancy firms re-enter the market at one end and providers such as The Co-op at the other end) and associates want to be managed and led differently. We see a different set of values from “Generation Y”, and even more so from the “Millennials”, who are not prepared to make the sacrifices to their family and personal lives that many of the current law firm leaders did. Indeed, we hear from many partners that no one in their teams actually wants to become a partner.

We see many law firms responding to these changes by looking at the external factors, such as financial targets, chargeable hours, and lock-up, and offering partners training to develop certain

skills. However, we believe that it is by working on their mindsets and their “inner-game”1 that partners and their firms will be successful in the long term.

This means that law firm partners have to act and lead differently than they once did if they are to survive in the medium term, much less prosper. But at present we don’t see much urgency among them to change. They are like the frog that has been put in a pan of cold water. The heat is being turned up, but they don’t sense the change; they need to wake up or else they will end up being boiled by more aware competition.

To be successful, it is key that all partners see themselves as leaders, not just as those who have been given a title and stepped into a formal leadership role. All partners need to make the transition from employees to owners – to take responsibility for their businesses and act like the owners that they are.

This is the essence of the “inside-out” approach. When partners get in-touch with themselves and become more authentic they maximize their own performance and, as a result, that of those who they lead. Daniel Goleman identified seven leadership styles2 that have varying degrees of impact, both positive and negative, on the culture of a firm, and that ultimately impact performance. We often see partners exhibiting the “harder” leadership styles of “pacesetting” and “coercive”. Goleman notes that these have a negative impact on climate or working atmosphere and

The inside-out approach to leadership



52

hence on engagement and, ultimately, on performance. Both clients and associates now require leaders to adopt a more collaborative and coaching approach. Clients want partners to treat them as equals, to ask questions that challenge and develop their thinking, and to help to co-create solutions to the problems they face. Being a high-performing leader is more about EQ (emotional intelligence) than IQ. Some lawyers find this transition hard given their historical focus and reliance on their technical expertise and knowledge of the law.

Inside-out approachOur state of mind is the key to our performance. Operating more consistently from a higher state of mind means that people make better decisions, are more creative, and build stronger relationships with others. Table 1, below, shows how we use Wilber’s integral model3 to take a fully informed and considered approach to leadership. Wilber’s approach takes in the four fundamental perspectives of looking at anything: the “internal” and “external” perspectives; and the “individual” and “collective” perspectives.

Table 1: Wilber’s integral model

By applying Wilber’s frame to a situation or problem, we are encouraged to look beyond the external factors that many law firm leaders focus on. These are easier to

“do something about” since they can be seen and, in the case of systems, leaders can insist on changes being made. However, leaders run a risk if they only consider and respond to the external perspective, as this is unlikely to be sufficient for real, sustained change. When it does not consider all four quadrants (i.e. perspectives), any change or leadership program is less likely to succeed.

In our experience, the importance of mindset is often overlooked by leaders, but that this is what really drives the behavior of individuals, and hence is key to managing and changing those behaviors, both in the leader and those they lead. This is because, as we believe (of ourselves and others), so we lead. This involves an exploration of both our conscious and unconscious (or shadow) beliefs. The first are relatively easy to explore but the second, by definition, are hidden. The job of a leader, therefore, is to explore these hidden shadow beliefs and bring them into the open. Cashman4 describes seven clues to the presence of a shadow belief as follows:

1. When others give us feedback that is inconsistent with how we see ourselves;

2. When we feel stuck or blocked with a real loss as to what to do next;

3. When our strengths become counter-productive and derail us;

4. When we are not open to new information, learning, or other people’s views;

5. If we react to a circumstances with an emotional response that is disproportionate to the situation;

6. When we find ourselves forcefully reacting to the limitations of others in a critical, judgmental way, we are often projecting our shadows onto others; and

7. If we often experience pain, trauma, or discomfort in our bodies.

Internal External

Individual Mindset Behavior and skills

Collective Culture Systems and procedures



53

Figure 1: Leading with persona

Leading from the inside out is an authentic self-expression that creates value for the leader and their organization. Those who can lead in this way mainly show their “character” to the outside world, which is the essential nature of the individual. Ralph Waldo Emerson described character as “a reserved force, which acts directly as

Figure 2: Leading from the inside-out with character

presence, and without means”.By contrast, “persona” is the personality

or “mask” that we wear to cope with life. Its purpose is to protect us from the external environment, as well as our own internal fears and limitations. To some extent, we all have a persona, but the degree can vary between leaders as follows:

Persona

Character

Persona

Character

Character Persona

“Leading from the inside-out” “Leading on the outside”

Transforms: opens up to possibilities and potentialities

Protects/copes: limits possibilities and potentialities

Guided by:

Authenticity Purpose Openness Trust Compassion Courage Creating value & contribution Balance – centeredness Fluidity – adaptability Peaceful presence

Guided by:

Image Safety, security, and comfort Control Fear Self-interest Avoidance Winning at all costs Distraction Resistance to change Uneasy presence

Table 2: Comparing leadership from character and persona



54

As leaders, it is essential to learn how to build our awareness of what is guiding our behavior. Table 2 shows the differences between leading from character and persona.

In our experience, we see many leaders relying on persona, which does not create a high performance culture.

How to operate from an inside-out understandingWe have found four key factors in leading from an inside out understanding:

1. Understanding the nature of realityThe first step is to really “see” that we are thinking creatures and create our reality from the inside out. Thought includes perceptions, associations, memories, beliefs, etc. Even the sense of sight relies on thought for us to be able to make sense of the visual stimulus coming through the eyes. We are like a fish in water in the sense that, because thought pervades every aspect of our experience, we overlook its role and significance in our lives.

The importance of this understanding is that we can then have a different relationship to our thinking in the sense of seeing it as a creative process that is generating our experience of life. This is why two people experiencing the same external situation can have a completely different perception and experience of that situation. This understanding enables us to see that we are always operating from a mental map that is a representation of reality. Like any map, it is only a representation; it is not the territory, but rather an interpretation of the territory created by our thinking.

2. Self-awarenessSelf-awareness is the key to learning and sustainable change. Only by increasing self-

awareness do we open up the possibility of responding differently to our experiences. We can only respond to the things that we are aware of at any given moment in time. However, people with a high degree of self-awareness are more able to reflect on themselves and their situation in that moment. This provides them with an opportunity to turn experience into learning. It could be argued that a key competitive advantage for an individual and an organization is the ability to learn and develop faster than the competition.

Self-awareness is also critical for leaders in their ability to understand and relate effectively to other people. Research on emotional intelligence highlights that if you want to increase your ability to build and sustain effective relationships, then increasing self-awareness is the place to start.

3. State of mindIt’s curious that we are called human “beings” not human “doings”. However, we see a tendency for leadership development to focus on the “doings” or behavior, rather than realizing that all behavior flows from our state of mind in the moment. Understanding that state of mind is what determines our level of performance.

From a higher state of mind, we have access to different thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. High performers are those that can still operate from a high state of mind even when the external circumstances are very tough. Other people can get dragged down to a lower state of mind, and are therefore less resourceful at the very moment that they need to be more resourceful.

When we are operating from a high state of mind:

Productivity goes up with less conscious effort and less stress;



55

We are more creative; We are more likely to have fresh thinking

and insight in response to challenging situations;

Positive results are produced much more consistently; and

We lose the fear of being “found out”, because we lose the need to “fake it ’til we make it”.

It’s natural for our state of mind to fluctuate throughout the day. It is important to recognize that we do not need to try to “manage” our state of mind. If we don’t engage with a lower state of mind then it will naturally shift. We’ve all had the experience of being frustrated about a situation one afternoon and felt ourselves drop into a low state of mind, and then the next morning our mood has shifted and we wonder what we were getting so worked up about the previous day. This points to the fact that our state of mind will self-correct.

The key is to really see the mistake of engaging with a low state of mind. Our thinking always makes sense to us from the state of mind that we are in. That is why everything can look “all doom and gloom” one day (from a low state of mind), and then our state of mind shifts and we feel able to cope with whatever life throws at us.

Therefore, if we don’t engage with our thoughts from a low state of mind, we allow them to pass and provide the opportunity for fresh thought and a change in perspective. While we feed thoughts from a low state of mind, we inadvertently keep them in place and don’t provide the space for fresh thinking. This is also where trying to defeat the thoughts by thinking more positively often doesn’t work either because we are trying to defeat thought with thought from a low state of mind. Invariably the negative thinking tends to win out.

4. Operating with freedomIt’s important to be aware of the responsibilities that we see as being part of our sense of identity. We see too many leaders trying to live up to an image that they have for themselves in terms of how they feel they “should” be behaving, and how they “should be seen”. This comes from a positive intention; however, it is misplaced. The problem is that as soon as you feel obligated to behave or be seen in a particular way, this limits your freedom to respond as you see fit in the situation. When this is the case, you are leading from persona, or the outside, as set out above. Effective leadership flows from a quiet mind where there is the freedom to respond from what feels right in the moment.

How to lead from the inside-outIn seeking to lead from the inside-out, we have found successful partners adopting the following strategies:

1. Maximizing performance by reducing interferencesFocusing on the “inner game”, as first articulated by Tim Gallwey in the 1970s, performance can be described by the following equation:

Performance = potential – interferences

Effective leadership means helping to create the conditions that enable people to release more of their inherent potential at work. What percentage of your potential does your partnership see?

Managing interferencesA leader can play an important role in helping people to understand and manage the interferences that stop them from bringing more of their inherent potential into



56

their performance. When we understand interferences, it becomes clear why we can be very confident and capable in one context and then find that those capabilities are not available to us in another situation.

Interferences fall into two broad categories: internal and external.

External interferences – Circles of concern, influence, and controlStephen Covey, in his book The 7 habits of Highly Effective People,5 presents a number of very valuable tools/techniques for being more effective. One of the areas he touches on is our tendency to waste time and energy on what he terms our “circle of concern”, rather than on the things that we can control and influence. He says that our circle of concern is always bigger than our circle of influence or control (see diagram below). Of course, it is very easy to spend time in our circle of concern because there are always so many things that can be bothering us in our life, from that really annoying work colleague to the state of the economy, to the frustration that our kids won’t do what we want them to do! What we often fail to recognize is that there is nothing we can do about matters in our circle of concern, and yet so many times in coaching we hear partners expending significant effort here.

However, when we get stuck with this focus for a period of time, it becomes highly stressful and the unintended consequence is that our circles of influence and control get smaller because we are not giving them as much time and attention as we could. The reverse also applies in the sense that, if we focus on our circles of influence and control, they actually get bigger. In work, you can really see this in operation: the people that focus on these two circles get more done, are more positive in their demeanor, and other people tend to give them more

responsibility because they are higher performers.

Figure 3: The three spheres of concern, control, and influence

How to use this model:

Make a list of all the things that are issues/challenges for you at the moment: the things that seem to be taking your time and attention;

Plot these in the appropriate circle (concern, control, and influence), ensuring that you are being realistic about what is within your control, and what is within your ability to influence;

For those things in your circle of concern, check whether there is anything you could be doing to positively influence the situation, e.g. if you are having problems with a particular practice area at work, is there someone you know who has good relationships with that part of the partnership that could help you influence the situation to build better relationships;

Recognize what you might have to let go of or accept is in your circle of concern; and

Consider whether you are doing everything you can in your circles of control and influence.

Concern

Influence

Control



57

What you realize as you work from this perspective is that all interferences are actually internal, because it is how we relate to external problems or difficulties that determines whether it becomes an interference or not. This is why two people experiencing the same interference can respond in completely different ways – one person may be very bothered, and the other person may hardly notice it at all and will therefore continue to perform well.

Internal interferencesInternal interferences primarily boil down to self-doubt and fear. The key here is helping to raise self-awareness so that the individual becomes more aware of what it is about the way that they are relating to a particular situation that is causing the internal interferences. Raising self-awareness leads to the person being able to be more “response-able” in the situation. Awareness is key in helping individuals to take more responsibility for their performance.

Context for performance

Figure 4: Helping individuals and teams to have a clear understanding and awareness of the different environments that impact performance

Our experience is that individuals who are able to sustain high performance over a period of time have a good awareness and understanding on these different environments, i.e. they:

Understand themselves; Tune into the people around them and

are able to be flexible in the way that they communicate and interact; and

Understand the unwritten rules, values, and assumptions that operate within the broader organizational culture. These are never what you are told during your induction, but they are the way that “things get done” within the organization. This is often the environment that trips up senior hires coming into an organization, as it takes times for someone to build up this broader awareness and understanding. You often pick this up through your personal network in the organization, and of course as a new person in the organization it takes a while to build up this network.

2. Intrinsic motivation How do we tap into intrinsic motivation? Leaders can get caught in the trap of thinking that they are responsible for the motivation of their team members. This, we believe, puts the focus of the leader in the wrong place in terms of looking at motivation extrinsically rather than intrinsically. Recognizing that motivation has to come from within means that the focus of the leader is on helping individuals to identify their own intrinsic motivation. We use a model that looks at:

Achievement; Enjoyment; and Learning.

Background cultural

conversation

The unwritten rules, values, and assumptions

of the culture

Immediate environment

Internal dialogue

Your primary work

environment

Speaking and listening to others



58

This model provides an opportunity to help the individual to explore what these factors mean to them and how they can enhance their motivation in the way that they think about, and engage with, their work.

3. Balancing challenge and supportEffective leadership is our ability to get this balance right: understanding the importance of challenge for an individual’s growth and development; and balancing it with their ability to respond to challenges that they are experiencing. Effective leaders are sensitive to how this balance works for the individuals that they lead.

4. Having effective conversationsIt could be argued that, as you become more senior in an organization, then you are increasingly being paid to have effective conversations. The inside-out understanding requires the leader to be really effective in two key skills:

1. Listening – Not just listening to the content of what is being said, but really listening to the way that the other person is talking so that you get an insight into the way that person constructs their experience; and

2. Reflecting, summarizing, and asking good questions.

ConclusionIt was Daniel Goleman’s research in 1998 which found that, while the qualities traditionally associated with leadership – such as intelligence, toughness, determination, and vision – are required for success, they are not in themselves sufficient. Truly effective leaders are also distinguished by a high degree of emotional intelligence. Our experience in working with partners in law firms shows that the most successful adopt an inside-

out approach to leadership. As Goleman noted, these skills can be learnt. This article summarizes how to adopt an inside-out approach to leadership in law firms.

About the authorsIan Paterson is a partner in Performance Consultants LLP, and serves as its CFO/COO. Ian focuses on helping partners in professional services firms perform better. He has worked with a number of law firms in the UK, delivering a range of coaching, mentoring, and leadership development programs.

Ian is an executive coach and consultant with 28 years of professional services experience. The last 11 years were as a partner at EY, Andersen, and Grant Thornton. His career included audit, restructuring, and corporate finance.

Ian was the first partner in EY’s EMEIA area to graduate from their Coach Champion Programme as a qualified internal coach. While at EY, Ian led the development of coaching across the UK and also supported the implementation of coaching across Europe for the transaction business. He was also responsible for leading L&D for transaction business in the UK. Between 2011 and 2012 Ian was the managing director of the EMCC in the UK. This role involved devising and implementing strategic plans to deliver on the EMCC’s purpose. In 2013 Ian was on the editorial board of the Ridler Report that researches trends in the use of executive coaching in professional services firms.

Steve Knight is a partner in Performance Consultants LLP, with a particular focus on program design and delivery. He has worked with a range of professional services clients, designing and delivering leadership development and coaching skills training.



59

Steve is an executive coach and consultant with 25 years of experience in the field of learning and development, with a particular focus on leadership development. He has been working as an independent consultant since January 2005.

Prior to working as an independent consultant he held a number of senior management roles at Ernst & Young. His last position was as the director of leadership development where he was responsible for formulating the firm’s approach to developing its future leaders. This included re-engineering the firm’s approach to the development and assessment of senior managers coming through to partnership. He was also responsible for overseeing the introduction of an accelerated leadership programme for people identified early in their careers as having the potential to become future leaders.

He is intrigued by the challenge of helping people to bring more of their potential through to performance. So often in organizations and in coaching, we can get trapped by trying to put in what was left out, rather than focusing on drawing out what is already there. Aldous Huxley once said, “There is nothing wrong with you, that what’s right with you cannot fix”. This quote typifies the approach that Steve has found to be a good starting point for working with individuals and organizations.

References

1. Gallwey, T., The Inner Game of Work:

Overcoming mental obstacles for maximum

performance, Texere Publishing, New York,

2000.

2. Goleman, D., “Leadership that gets results”,

Harvard Business Review, March-April, 2000.

3. For Ken Wilber’s “Integral Model” see Wilber,

K., “Introduction to the Integral Approah

(and the AQAL Map)”, www.kenwilber.com/

writings/read_pdf/34.

4. Cashman, K., Leadership from the Inside Out,

Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco, 2008.

5. Covey, S., The 7 habits of Highly Effective

People, Simon & Schuster, London, 2004.


61

By Jim Rishwain, chair and chief executive officer of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

IN THIS case study, Jim Rishwain describes his own experience leading Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP through a period of change and growth, and explains how to build trust and confidence in your leadership. The study focuses on four essential maxims for law firm leaders.

1. Break down silos and share information. Structure teams and communication systems so that knowledge can flow.

2. Connect people to the firm’s leadership. Be open and authentic in all communications and be available and responsive. People need to feel they are a part of what is happening, not that something is happening to them.

3. Be principled and consistent in making decisions that are in the best interests of the firm. Avoid making exceptions or giving special treatment.

4. Do not try to be all things to all people. Know your firm’s focus and strengths.

In 2006, I stepped into the leadership of a law firm that had a new name, an expanded geographic footprint, and a mix of lawyers adjusting to a new partnership. Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman was the product of two successive mergers in 2001 and 2005. The mergers created a greatly strengthened US platform with global reach.

Our immediate challenge was to

integrate the formerly independent firms and tap into the newly created synergies. We were figuring out how to foster the collegiality of a partnership within a worldwide organisation and were purposeful about making decisions that would position the firm for long-term success.

The measures we took as a merged firm helped us to weather the financial crisis. When the storm hit, we were a much more transparent, fiscally strong firm. Our partners were aligned and part of the firm’s direction. Not only were we equipped to withstand the shocks of the downturn, but we emerged stronger.

Building trust, inspiring confidence, and elevating performance have been our guiding principles. We have cultivated an open, collaborative, and dynamic firm by:

Integrating people, practices, and offices into a single firm;

Connecting people to the firm’s leadership and direction; and

Bringing transparency into operations and consistency to decision-making.

When a firm has these things in place, it is easier for the leadership to implement strategy and for lawyers to focus on their practices and clients.

The years since the financial crisis have been transformational for the world, and no less so for the legal industry. It is no longer enough to have great clients and great lawyers – the demise of prestigious and

Case study: Reservoir of trust – Build trust and confidence in your leadership



62

eminent law firms has demonstrated this. A winning formula requires more. Warren Buffet once said that when the tide goes out, you learn who is swimming naked. For Pillsbury, the downturn was a true test of the choices we had made and the culture we had in place long before the collapse of Lehman Brothers. That essential culture still guides our firm today.

Strategic industry focusAs we sought unity within our partnership, we knew we could not be all things to all people. Our answer was to focus on key industries and to choose them in a purposeful way. We looked at client needs, the strengths of the firm, and the industries that would be the drivers of the global economy. The result is our sector focus on four core industries:

1. Energy and natural resources;2. Financial services;3. Technology; and4. Real estate and construction.

By narrowing our focus, we ensured that no single region, practice, or office was dominant, which in turn broke down silos and encouraged multidisciplinary and multi-office teams.

As we sharpened our strategic industry focus, we also pursued a client service strategy oriented around client teams. From our first-year lawyers to our senior partners, all Pillsbury lawyers belong to both a practice section and one or more of our 38 client teams. The teams serve a range of clients, from the most longstanding to the fastest growing, and allow us to better coordinate our efforts to provide responsive client service.

The vast majority of our lawyers are in the US, but nearly a quarter of our revenues

come from serving clients outside the US. We have geographic practices focusing on Japan, China, the Middle East and Africa, and Latin America, and each comprises lawyers in offices and practices across the firm.

A client relationship is not constrained to one lawyer, practice, or office. A lawyer in Houston can work with a lawyer in London on an energy infrastructure project in Central Asia for a Japan-based client. A financial services client can instruct us for a complicated structured financing while we handle its global IP portfolio or manage a business process outsourcing arrangement.

Taking the industry focus and client focus a step further, we build teams around emerging trends. These teams are multidisciplinary and focus on anticipating the risks and opportunities that are around the corner – the things that keep a client up at night or that will give them an advantage next month or next year.

In fact, we are not afraid to jump on emerging issues before we have sizable work. Since launching two years ago, our water resources team and public-private partnerships team have taken off, driven in great part by the growing scarcity of water and the tightening of government budgets. We are seeing similar growth in demand for our unmanned aircraft systems team, which launched in 2014.

The success of these firmwide teams – which include privacy and data protection, crisis management, and social media – shows that, when you build teams at the right time and devote resources to aggregating your talent, the work will follow.

Building confidenceIn my first year as firm chair, every decision management made was widely questioned. We needed to inspire confidence in the firm



63

so that lawyers could focus on clients and collaboration.

I place great importance on internal communications. Successful integration works in an environment of open and authentic communication. That tone is set at the top by putting in place channels that connect people to leadership, and to the firm’s success. People need to feel that they are a part of what is happening – and not feel that things are happening to them.

We have a disciplined internal communications program. I communicate through an internal blog where my colleagues can share comments. I post communications to partners on Monday, to associates on Tuesday, and to the entire firm on Wednesday. I also send weekly emails to practice section leaders on Thursday and the firm’s board on Friday.

I travel to a different office each week where I join the office’s partners for informal lunch meetings. My travel calendar is posted on the firm’s intranet and my door is always open for one-on-one meetings. Members of my executive team, which includes the chief operating officer and the chief human resources officer, visit each office twice a year to meet with lawyers and staff for lively and candid discussions.

When you have a protocol for open communication, it allows for a much smoother experience when executing big changes. Our decision to open a new operations center in Nashville, Tennessee, is just one example. The center is the headquarters for the firm’s support services, optimizing efficiency and supporting our lawyers around the world.

It is not all transmit and no receive: we are looking to engage people. If you find people who are bright, ambitious, and forward-thinking and give them a growth opportunity – even if it is before they are quite ready – they will rise to the challenge.

For example, a component of our succession planning has been to engage partners who are early in their careers in the direction of the firm. We have identified partners who we want to take a greater role in client relationships and in building a profile for themselves and the firm. The program is board approved and has its own budget and director. These partners are increasingly holding more leadership positions and taking responsibility for firm initiatives.

Also in play are efforts to connect associates to the firm. We hold conferences for our counsel every year and conferences for mid-level associates every other year. These conferences create connections across offices and practices. They also empower our next generation of lawyers to form a vision for the firm, and take a greater stake in its direction.

Equal if not more energy goes into connecting with clients. Many firms talk about client focus or being client-centric, but we live it. In early 2009, we launched a call to action, asking every lawyer to meet face-to-face with clients to learn about their needs in the wake of the economic crisis. We conducted 1,800 meetings in a span of eight weeks. Every partner is expected to sit down with clients once or twice a year to discuss budgets. I meet with one or two clients a week, 50–70 a year.

We are in the position to be dynamic and responsive because our partners no longer second-guess leadership. There is still a healthy amount of dialogue and debate, but it is productive rather than obstructive. Overall, the partnership is confident in our strategic direction, allowing us to be more ambitious and forward-thinking.

Fiscal managementIt was important, as a merged firm, for us to win confidence in our fiscal management.



64

We decided to be very transparent. Any partner, at any time, can access the firm’s performance metrics – whether they are the fees we billed yesterday, our year-to-date collections, or our monthly performance against budget.

We did away with aspirational budgeting and no longer carry long-term debt. Transparency and principled decision-making have helped us to weather the downturn and freed us up to make investments in our future.

We opened an office in Abu Dhabi in 2011, a support services operation center in Nashville in 2012, and offices in Austin and Beijing in 2014. We have launched a sweeping talent development program, a new pro bono program, have made significant real estate investments in our 19 offices, and have hired more than 50 new partners – all since 2011, and while taking on no debt.

Some of the business practices that destabilized many law firms – things like offering side deals to different partners, or not putting all partners under the same compensation scheme – are not done at Pillsbury.

The same disciplined and principled decision-making is at work in our partner hiring. We only make offers to practitioners who are a good fit with our firm. Are they team players? Do our values align? Does their practice fit our sector focus, client base, and practice base? We want them to benefit from our platform and client relationships so that they can thrive here.

New joiners must also fit within our compensation scheme. Our offers tend to be conservative in base compensation and bonuses are time-limited. We reach an agreement on where the individual or group will slot into our compensation system only after they have settled in. We would rather

be conservative in making ten offers to ten people who successfully integrate than to make 20 offers and have only ten succeed.

We foster a collaborative partnership dynamic by making sure that every partner has a share of equity and that profitability is a shared concern. We are careful about managing expectations and moving the conversation away from profits per partner to the investments we want to make in the firm. Partners appreciate the longer view, which creates a willingness to pull together.

Building trust and confidence in firm leadershipDo

Communicate, communicate, communicate! Put in place channels that connect people to the firm’s leadership. Be open and authentic.

Anticipate who will be affected by your decisions and involve them early.

Practice consistency in how decisions are made or rules are applied, whether it is compensation, hiring, or promotions.

Bring transparency into financial structures.

Recognize and reward firm-first behavior.

Give opportunities to people who are bright and determined, but not necessarily the most seasoned.

Don’t Make ad hoc decisions. Give anyone special treatment

or make allowances, like entering into special side-deals, giving battlefield rewards, or making mid-year adjustments in compensation.



65

The next big challengeLaw firm models continue to be tested, but if you build trust and collaboration throughout, you end up with a stronger and more stable firm.

Sometimes you make decisions that are roundly criticized, but that may be from the most vocal 10–15 percent. It is tough to get past these, but you cannot change course for a handful of critics or naysayers. If you have built up trust and involved people in the decision-making, it is easier to make decisions that may be unpopular to some or that move the firm in a new direction.

Strengthening our platform for serving clients in the global economy is our next big challenge – growing in each of our existing markets and expanding our key practice areas. As an example, the nexus between London and the Middle East is just one area on which we are focused. Once again, our decisions are being driven by our sector focus, client focus, and the firm’s existing strengths.

We have been in London since 1972, and our presence has become acutely important to clients who use us for global finance, cross-border transactions, and international energy projects. Investing further in our English law capabilities is just one path we are on. We have hired more English law practitioners in our London, Tokyo, and Abu Dhabi offices. Additionally, we see opportunity in China; we have been in Shanghai since 2006 and we opened in

Beijing in 2014. All of this strengthens our global reach and our ability to serve clients on matters that cross borders and regions.

As a leader intent on change, you need to be able to move people toward untried strategies. Lawyers are often more interested in precedent – what has been done before. You must lead by example, be inclusive and engaged, authentic and open, and stay true to your decisions. When you have trust, you have the freedom to stay focused on what you need to do to be competitive in an industry and economy where no assumption is safe.

A version of this article first appeared in Managing Partner mgazine in January 2013.

About the authorJames M. Rishwain, Jr is the chief executive officer of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, an international, full-service law firm with strengths in energy, financial services, real estate, and technology. His primary responsibility is to execute the firm’s strategic plan and policies established by the Pillsbury Board, which he chairs. He is the board’s key adviser, the top executive in Pillsbury’s leadership, and the firm’s chief visionary, decision-maker, and communicator.

In addition, he conducts a highly commended real estate practice, representing some of the most successful real estate developers, investors, lenders, and owners. He was named to the Los Angeles Business Journal’s list of “Who’s Who in L.A. Law”, was California Lawyer’s 2005 “Attorney of the Year”, and has been among the Daily Journal’s “Managing Partner A-List”. He is consistently ranked by peers as one of the most accomplished real estate attorneys in the United States.

Mr Rishwain is an active proponent of diversity in the legal profession and received

Divide leadership responsibilities – it dilutes accountability and ownership of failure or success.

Give more weight to the most vocal opinions – they often represent a small minority within the firm.


leadership law firms-a4 - ark group · 2020-04-06 · effective leadership is a series of...

Documents