The aftermath of attending a large conference such as the ABA Annual always leaves me in a pondering mood, as if the experience has changed my perspective, but I’m not sure how. There is always a whirlwind of input: presentations and meetings and networking that are exhilarating and exhausting at the same time. And I find myself asking: what concept addressed at the conference was the most interesting as a reflection of how the profession was changing?
Certainly in these times, there were lots of concepts to choose from. Law practice today feels like a moving stream of new ideas and processes and challenges. The way law is practiced has never been a topic so front and center as now, when technology, economics, social media and the legal marketplace has rolled over professional traditions like a tsunami over beach tents. How to conduct an effective voir dire has been replaced with how to use jury selection technology. Substance abuse as the hot ethics topic has been replaced with the efforts to define ethical conduct in cyberspace. Virtual law practice presentations dominated the law practice management track. Technology and social media issues simply infiltrated the schedule of events as if they had seniority.
But there is another theme emerging at these events, somewhat understated but, I think, very telling in the evolution of practicing law as we know it. It reveals how new concepts of lawyering have been influenced by the canons of social media marketing: being authentic and creating relationships with consumers for business success. And hopefully it reflects the realization that aggression and manipulation need not be two hallmark attributes of a good lawyer.
The theme is a two-fold concept: practice law by aligning our professional selves with our authentic selves, and by authentically connecting with and caring about our clients. Not exactly consistent with what we learned in law school.
Back in the day, I worked hard to become that thing that women become when they learn how to be as aggressive as men. I didn’t care about my clients; in fact, I hated meeting with them, when I had to listen to their agonizing stories of victimization. And I didn’t care about myself, that I was trying to be someone I wasn’t. My litigation days lasted about 7 years, then I decided to have children, later moving on to endeavors within the legal profession that didn’t require setting foot in a courtroom.
Now I look at the ABA CLE schedule and see courses like Fuel the Spark: Success in Law and Life, led by Kevin Houchin, founder of The Space Between Center For Creative Spirit in Business. The event focused on 5 guiding values for balancing your life and a legal career. It started with a 15-minute guided meditation intended to bring home the point that before you structure your practice, it’s best to get comfortable with yourself (I seem to have missed that one in my law school’s curriculum). Kevin’s Space Between Center was founded to help people reach their full potential through intertwining personal, creative and business development.
Then there was The Revolutionary Business Model for Lawyers: Systems to Make More Money AND Be Loved By Your Clients, led by Alexis Martin Neely. This event introduced participants to a system for solos and small firms that shifts from the old, traditional and broken law practice model into a new paradigm business model that clients love, is sustainable financially and allows you to work just 3-4 days in your office. The goal is to be the lawyer you always wanted to be, and be loved (and paid) by your clients.
Outside of the confines of the ABA Meeting, you will find sites/communities like Cutting Edge Law, whose goal is to help lawyers define themselves as peacemakers, problem solvers and healers of conflict. The founder, J. Kim Wright, authored Lawyers As Peacemakers, published by the ABA. Her venture has inspired global discussion about the value of lawyers in humanizing conflict.
Technology and economics are clearly driving forces in shaping the future of our profession. The legal and ethical issues to be explored are overwhelming, requiring the dedication of those passionate about the process and the results. But there is also something else afoot: an acknowledgement that our legal system has been defined by a model of confrontation and arrogance that doesn’t work. Putting a human face on the participants in legal conflict, both clients and their attorneys, can change a system that often leaves waste and disillusionment in its wake.
Is this the experience you expected when you envisioned your practice? Or were you anticipating a more satisfying result for both you and your client?
Donna- This is a great post, and you bring up a really good point about technology and the ways it is changing the way we practice law. While many people might assume that technology and social media and other online outlets would take the human out of our work, your blog reminds us that it is actually forcing us to think more about our authentic selves when dealing with clients. We are no longer just suits performing a service…We are real people with kids and dogs and favorite books and interests, and technology allows our clients to see both our ability to get work done and our personal interests. I like your concept of aligning our professional selves with our authentic selves. Thanks for sharing!
Donna, thanks for sharing your takeaways from the conference. Like Kevin, I like your concept of aligning our professional selves with our authentic selves. I think this applies to lawyers and non-lawyers alike (I'm not a lawyer).
I recently came to learn of Tim Batdorf, a collaborant of Threhold Advisors. Anyone interested in finding meaning, fulfillment and satisfaction in their practice may want to connect with Tim or get his book "The Lawyers Guide to Being Human." Here's a link to Tim's bio: http://www.thresholdadvisors.com/
Thanks again, Donna, for your thoughtful insight.
You make some very thoughtful points. Have you ever read Steven Keeva's book "Tranforming Practices." It touches upon some of these themes and I recommend it. Separately, I endorse you view of the law as a profession that can be a helping and healing one.
-Jon Olson
General Counsel
Blackbaud, Inc.
Jon: Thanks for your comment. I have not heard of that book, but I will put it on my list to track down!
This is great stuff that will attract like minds. The issues raised should also include how to care yet not become emotionally attached to a client that will prove exhausting. There always has to be a fine balance. For instance, some clients will sense the fresh new perspective you've obtained and will try to take advantage of your time.
Other issues arise when a client thinks you really care about them and their case or issue, but if you ever try to cut them off time wise in any way, they will begin to feel you haven't been genuine,
I would take this new approach of caring about one's client on a case by case basis based on your initial analysis of the client. Do they appear really needy? If so, you could be in for a lot of trouble if you open the door to caring about them. It might even lead to a restraining order filed against them if they become angry you cut off the caring and nurturing of them and their case.
In view of the new perspective, there are apparent dangers to the approach. I don't believe this new approach can possibly be intelligently applied in all situations. Each situation warrants a certain approach with any particular client.
Then of course you have the conflict of interest that arises if you become too emotionally involved in a case to the omission of relevant facts, etc.
Though the fresh new perspective sounds wonderful, it can lead to various bad scenarios. I just thought I'd raise a few of them. Thanks for the great article.
Hi, Cheryl: I totally agree that these are important points to consider when deciding how to form your relationship with each client. I’ll definitely refer back to them the next time this topic is revisited!
What does it matter if the laymen are making less of the judicial decisions? For one, most people don’t want to go to jury duty. And secondly, if everybody involved agrees on ADR than their happy and their dispute gets taken care of.