Big Law Implicit Bias – How Can it be Fixed?

“Never judge someone

By the way he looks

Or a book by the way it's covered;

For inside those tattered pages,

There's a lot to be discovered.”

Steven Cosgrove

As a member of the board of directors of the Association of Corporate Counsel, I am privileged to have the opportunity to participate in a fair share of ACC sponsored events. I recently attended the ACC Foundation GC Dinner in Chicago where twenty-four in-house counsel and law firm lawyers, gathered together in an intimate and “safe” environment to discuss how to improve the relationship between in-house lawyers and their law firm counter-parts. Assembled in the room were some of the best and brightest private practitioners in the country and their in-house counterparts.

The dinner was extraordinarily successful on many fronts. Everyone in attendance appreciated the need for outside counsel to develop close relationships with their in-house counterparts in order to build trust. Another hot topic was the need for in-house lawyers to bring “value” to their companies through the relationship with outside counsel. I’ll discuss these topics in future posts.

What really struck me as something that requires immediate comment was the experience of a young African American lawyer regarding a situation he faced while attempting to broker a deal between a client and the management team of his law firm. At the time, the young African American lawyer was pursuing a large client with potential for significant future billings. In order to help bring the client into the firm, he offered an attractive alternative fee arrangement to the client – subject to approval of firm management. As related by the young lawyer, he pitched the alternative fee arrangement to firm management and the idea was immediately dismissed out of hand. However, several months later, a lawyer who was not African American pitched a very similar proposal on behalf of the same client and the deal was accepted. The implication was very clear – the business deal was rejected in the first instance because the lawyer pitching it was African American.

I was flabbergasted. I found it very difficult to fathom that, in the enlightened world in which we live today (especially in the legal profession), a good business deal would be quashed simply because the pitch was made by a black lawyer. Of course, I have no idea what went through the mind of firm management as they made their decision. If, in fact, the conscious decision was made not to accept the proposal based on the race of the person making it then this would be a case of outright racism. However, I posit that this was not the case[1].

I cannot speak from a first person perspective when it comes to this lawyer’s experience as I am not a “big law” African American mid-level associate trying to build a book of business. However, as circumstances allow, I make it a point to seek to understand the perspectives of those who do not share my background. After the dinner ended, I reached out to another in-house lawyer who was African American. He confirmed that the experience related by the firm lawyer was not uncommon. While we did not have time to delve into the topic on a deeper level (nor do I have the space to do so here), I hope to continue the conversation soon and to follow up in an additional post on the subject. The question thus remained – “Why did this happen?”

In trying to answer the question, I circled back to some reading I had done on the topic of “Implicit Bias”. Implicit Bias (also known as “Unconscious Bias” or “Hidden Bias”) has been described as negative associations that ordinary people are found to harbor in relation to various social groups – even while honestly reporting that they regard themselves as lacking these biases. Stated another way – it is believing that one is impartial, but behaving as if one is not[2]. Experience shows that one is most likely to be implicitly biased in favor of those with whom one identifies and biased against those who are “different”. I suppose this makes sense, after all, if someone is “like me”, I can trust them – right?[3]

It is particularly important for lawyers to understand implicit bias because, once understood, it becomes an important tool for the manner in which we approach our day-to-day jobs. A study by Harvard researchers shows that implicit biases vary from person to person and that implicit attitudes are modified by experience.  And the good news is that implicit bias can be overcome through awareness, acknowledgement and conscious effort. The Harvard researchers tell us that one who wishes to rid oneself of an implicit bias can seek experiences that might reverse or undo the patterns that created the unwanted preference. A great example of a step that lawyers can take to help rid themselves of implicit bias is to interact with people or learn about people who counter the implicit stereotypes.

Once we understand that we may have a bias for a particular group or groups over others, we can attempt to manage our bias, check it at the door when making decisions or giving advice that pertains to or affects that group or a person within that group. For example, a lawyer or compliance professional must consciously discard implicit biases when assessing the credibility of a manager during an investigation or, when making decisions about accepting another lawyer’s proposal to offer a deal to a new client to bring in new business.

How do you know if you harbor implicit biases? I invite you to test your self-awareness of bias against the actual bias shown by your behavior by taking the brief Harvard Implicit Bias Test. While not perfect or absolute, the test results should move one to serious self-reflection and openness to the possibility that one’s thinking is not as objective as one might hope or believe – you will likely be very surprised by the delta between what you believe about yourself and the objective results of the test. I also urge you to recommend the test to your colleagues and friends. Implicit biases can be weakened, but only through awareness and open-mindedness to the possibility.

“Strength lies in differences, not in similarities”

Stephen R. Covey

---

[1] “Social psychologists use the word prejudice to describe people who report and approve negative attitudes toward outgroups. Most people who show an implicit preference for one group (e.g., White people) over another (e.g., Black people) are not prejudiced by this definition. The IAT shows biases that are not endorsed and that may even be contradictory to what one consciously believes. So, no, we would not say that such people are prejudiced. It is important to know, however, that implicit biases can predict behavior. When we relax our active efforts to be egalitarian, our implicit biases can lead to discriminatory behavior, so it is critical to be mindful of this possibility if we want to avoid prejudice and discrimination.” Harvard Study, visited 5/30/16.

[2] It should be stressed that the study of Implicit Bias is not limited to racial bias – there are many biases that exist, for example biases based on age, physical appearance, gender or occupation.

[3] African Americans are not immune to negative implicit biases – about one-half of African Americans prefer Whites, the other half prefers Blacks.  National Center for State Courts paper, visited 5/30/16.

Focus on Your Big Picture to Thrive, not Just Survive!

Focus:  a point upon which attention, activity, etc, is directed or concentrated;  to fix attention (on); concentrate. Dictionary.com

I often start a column with a definition because it helps me stay focused on the message I am trying to convey. I am reminded of the need to focus every time I walk into the office and see the pile of papers on my desk and the ever present reminders popping up on my calendar; when I experience the constant interruption of phone calls and walk-ins. What do I have to do today to stay focused on the tasks at hand? However, the concept of staying focused begs an even larger question – What is the goal upon which my efforts should be focused?

We can have no focus unless we have clearly defined goals. How can one define tasks upon which to focus when one does not have goals established that allow for a strategic setting of tasks to achieve those goals? In other words, how can we figure out how to get from Point A to Point B unless we understand the location of Point B. Once we know, we can map a route to get there.

I am sure that most of you have seen the SMART acronym.  Goals must be:

S = Specific

M = Measurable

A = Attainable

R = Realistic

T = Timely

While the SMART method is useful, I am "focused" on goal setting at an even more basic level. I was vividly reminded of the need to have goals when I was recently in a meeting with a group of volunteers who assist in the leadership of a charitable organization. Many ideas on programming and how to improve the group were bantered about, all ideas were good, some were excellent! However, the unfamiliar observer might have noticed that the ideas, bright as they were, were also disparate and  non-cohesive in the sense that they did not seem to point to a common interest. One of the participants finally took a step back and interjected: What is the goal of [our organization]? We were flummoxed. All the brainstorming was taking place in a vacuum!

How does this relate to in-house counsel?  Many of us plod through life, day by day, hoping for better, thankful for what we have (as we should be), working hard at our jobs. We consider it a good day when we give some good advice, help a client out of a pickle, solve a problem, proactively manage the company away from trouble, help a friend, whatever. The next day is the same thing. You might call this “surviving” as opposed to thriving. Many of us are fine with just getting by, others need to thrive.

What do you want out of your career? Do you want to be a specialist in a particular area of the law? Are you looking to be the next general counsel of General Electric? Do you want to strike out on your own and use your in-house experience in the private firm setting? Are you looking to back down on the hours and spend more time with the family? Each of these goals demand specialized, differentiated strategies. The tasks required of one goal do not fit within the scheme of tasks required to achieve the other goals.

When goals are clearly identified, we can develop task-oriented strategies to achieve them. By knowing the big picture and focusing on the tasks required to get us there, we have purpose. With each task completed comes a sense of accomplishment, a sense of having done something concrete and worthwhile – because we have inched closer to our goal.

So while the pile of paper may not seem to get any shorter, you can thrive in your career as you accomplish tasks and move forward to your end game. By focusing on the smaller tasks necessary to the achievement of your longer term goals, you make progress. Progress in turn brings a sense of well-being. A cycle is created whereby your goals are affirmed through progress and satisfaction which brings forth more effort to accomplish the next set of tasks and so on and on. Now – stop reading and get back to that stack of paper…..

“People with goals succeed because they know where they’re going.“ Earl Nightingale

It takes Great Courage to Do the Right Thing

“Courage is rightly esteemed the first of human qualities... because it is the quality which guarantees all others.”

Winston Churchill

I wrote a column a while back in which I discussed a difficult decision that might one day be faced by every general counsel – whether to “press the button” that could kill their career for the sake of doing what is right or to preserve their future by towing the company line (Courage, Influence and Civility).  Reflecting on this column triggered memories of a past experience at my former company.  In 2002, Spiegel, Inc. was experiencing a perfect storm – SEC compliance failures, alleged fraud on the part of the directors (who have denied any wrongdoing), problems with the company's credit issuing bank and the secured assets it leveraged to generate cash, issues with its lenders and breached loan covenants, a crashing retail environment and defaulting credit card holders. 

I had the privilege of working for a general counsel who walked the walk when faced with the “press the button” decision.  My personal commitment to ethical behavior was affirmed and strengthened through my mentor’s example. 

When Bob Sorensen came to Spiegel in June 2001, it was to be the capstone of a very successful legal career.  He would end on a high note as the GC of a Chicago institution, a grand catalog company with national retail operations (Eddie Bauer) and one of the most lauded internet sites of the time.  With revenues upwards of three billion dollars, Spiegel was one of the big retail players. Sales were strong, or so it appeared, and the company was doing reasonably well. 

However, under the surface, trouble was brewing and it was about to become public. The SEC was investigating Spiegel, the OCC was investigating the bank it owned, outside counsel was forced to “noisily” withdraw from representing the company and sales started to dive.  

So, not long after becoming the General Counsel of Spiegel Inc. in June 2001, Sorensen was put in the unenviable position of guiding a sinking ship through waters fraught with compliance issues.  Rather than set forth the sordid details in this brief column, I refer the reader to the SEC Independent Examiner’s Report (Crimmins Report) – an excellent read and a very good tool to help lawyers gain a real sense of what it means to be faced with a career ending ethical decision.  I strongly urge all in-house counsel to take the time to read the report. 

Sorensen had the good fortune to work side by side with Mike McKillip, Vice President of Audit, who reported directly to the parent’s audit committee in Germany.  Together, these men faced many ethical challenges, the seriousness of which are faced by few people in their careers.  They were subject to intense internal political fallout, peer criticism and potential civil and criminal exposure.  Notwithstanding these pressures, these men never once wavered from their commitment to do what is right. 

Not one year into his tenure, according to the report, German management referred to Sorensen, McKillip and others in U.S. management who repeatedly communicated the troubling situations with the SEC etc. to the board, as “black painters” – pessimists who were exaggerating the seriousness of the situation.  They dismissed their objections as flights of fancy.  It was  suggested that Sorensen be terminated. 

As set forth in the report, when faced with important decisions on corporate action, Sorensen repeatedly insisted on taking the high road at each and every ugly turn.  While this may seem an obvious choice, the report makes it very clear that Sorensen was the leader of a small and distinct minority of U.S. executives who advocated taking the right actions over the objection of senior German leadership.    

Sorensen and McKillip would tell you today that the pressure they faced from the board of directors and the expatriate CEO was so intense that it took years off their lives.  Yet they stayed with the company and insisted on doing the right thing.  Sorensen and McKillip ended up staying with Spiegel to the bitter end, Chapter 11 and the ultimate sale of all assets. 

When their tenure at Spiegel ended, Sorensen retired and McKillip went to work as the Director of Internal Audit for the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America – he used to say that he went to work for God.  McKillip died last September at the age of 59, and I (along with several colleagues) truly believe that his days at Spiegel contributed to his death at a young age.  Both men have inspired many others by way of their honorable and ethical example. 

Mike McKillip was a very good friend of mine and I know that he would not have done anything differently if given another chance, even knowing how it would affect his health.  Among many honorable legacies left behind by Mike McKillip, his unwavering commitment to ethical corporate citizenship is among his greatest. 

What is the moral of the story?  Today’s general counsel often serves as more than just the top legal advisor in a company: trusted business advisor, financial analyst, compliance officer, ethics compass, counselor and advocate.  Because the GC has more than one role, she may face an increase in the number of circumstances that require her to provide ethical or moral analysis and not limit herself to just business or legal considerations. At the end of the day, each of us must be able to look at ourselves in the mirror and be content with who we see.  We, like Sorensen and McKillip, must know that we have done our best to represent our clients zealously, professionally, competently and ethically.  We must ALWAYS do the right thing.

Character cannot be developed in ease and quiet. Only through experience of trial and suffering can the soul be strengthened, vision cleared, ambition inspired, and success achieved.

Helen Keller 

Courage, influence and civility*

Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. -C. S. Lewis

A few weeks back, I had the pleasure of attending an ethics program co-sponsored by DLA Piper  and Major, Lindsey & Africa .  Susan Lichtenstein (Hill-Rom), Stasia Kelley (DLA Piper) and Paul Williams (MLA) informed an attentive audience of what it is like to be in the boardroom when it comes time to make a very personal decision – whether to “press the button” that will effectively end your future with the company, if not your career.

In a nutshell, the program focused on the GC as trusted adviser, financial analyst, compliance officer and legal advocate.  The panel discussed the business needs for a GC with multi-dimensional skill sets and what happens as a result – an increase in the number of circumstances in which the GC is faced with business/legal situations requiring ethical (and not just business or legal) considerations. 

GCs are faced with balancing the need for creating trust and synergy with the business team against ethical obligations to ensure the company is behaving “properly” – meaning legally and, in some cases, “ethically”.  How can a GC continue to build relationships with the business operation executives while also acting as the company’s moral compass, responsible for reporting ethical breaches to the board?

First, the GC must have an unwavering commitment to ethical conduct at all levels in the company.  She must sow the seeds of a “culture of compliance” and nurture that culture throughout her tenure.  This commitment must be unwavering, for it will no doubt be tested.

Second, she must not only talk the talk, but she must also walk the walk.  Ethical considerations should be raised whenever an ethical concern presents.  Ethical considerations should also be part of the decision matrix, so as to ensure consideration of the ethical implications of a decision, even if ethical concerns are not immediately obvious.

Third, the GC must make known her commitment to ethics to every board member, executive and line worker in the company.  It must be communicated to the company frequently and regularly.  GCs have influence within their organizations and should use it.

Fourth, she must have an excellent relationship with the board so that each member feels absolutely confident that if the time comes, she will press that button and make them aware of all serious issues affecting the company.  More importantly, they will trust her judgment and follow her advice in rectifying the problem.    

In thinking about how we might influence our organizations in the care and feeding of an ethical environment, often overlooked is how we might influence our outside lawyers to practice in an ethical and civil manner.  Lawyers do not enjoy a reputation for being kind to one another.  Often, clients expect us to act nasty, disrespectful and mean to our adversaries.  Some clients even believe that a lawyer cannot possibly zealously represent a client unless they act in such a manner. 

I believe in-house lawyers, and particularly GCs, are well positioned to work a change in the legal environment so that clients will learn to expect nothing less than the utmost in decency from their lawyers.  In-house lawyers hire and pay firm lawyers.  Firms listen to their clients.  If we charge our outside team of lawyers with the responsibility to be civil, professional and yes, even polite – they will listen.  I am absolutely convinced that if we reward professional behavior (with fees and more work) and discourage underhanded gamesmanship (by referring work to other firms), the legal world will change. 

In-house lawyers have the responsibility to foster a culture of compliance and ethics within their own organizations.  In thinking outside the box (extending her influence outside the company), the GC can extend her influence beyond a culture of ethics, to one of civility by and between the outside lawyers, as they zealously advocate for their clients. 

Each of us must be able to look at ourselves in the mirror and be content with what we see.  We must know that we have done our best to represent our clients zealously, professionally, competently and ethically and that we have conducted ourselves in a manner that reflects well on the profession we have chosen.

*Originally published on August 9, 2012 here:
http://h20cooler.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/inside-perspective-courage-influence-and-civility/

Emotional Intelligence

“…the subset of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ feelings and emotions, to discriminate among them and to use this information to guide one’s thinking and actions” Peter Salovey and John D. Mayer, “Emotional Intelligence”, 1990

A high Emotional Intelligence Quotient, or EQ, is an essential element of a successful lawyer’s personality. This is readily apparent from the definition set forth above. Some scholars believe that one’s EQ is set at birth while others believe that Emotional Intelligence can be learned and developed. In either case, breaking down the several elements that make up the EQ helps one to better understand the concept of EI. When one is aware of the various factors that enter into the EQ, one can work to harness the insight gained and enhance the ability to interact with the client.

As is the case in traditional psychological sciences, there are several schools of thought that address the concept of EI. I will look at the model posed by Salovey and Mayer in their 1990 article “Emotional Intelligence.”

Salovey and Mayer break down EI into four basic elements: (1) Perceiving emotions; (2) Reasoning with emotions; (3) Understanding emotions; and (4) Managing emotions. In the context of our profession, it is very important for us to be in tune with the emotions of our clients.

You might wonder why someone’s emotional state is so important in our delivery of legal advice. It is important to remember, while our client is the company, the company is made up of people. People cannot be separated from their emotions. As people and employees, they may have concerns about their job performance, the decisions they have made that are now being questioned (or are going to make based on your advice), the mistakes they may have made (or are perceived to have made) and impact they are having on the business. People also have lives outside the company. A sick wife, child or parent, financial problems, major life decisions – all have an impact on the emotional well being of the individual and hence impact the manner in which they address the business problem at hand and in turn the manner in which you provide counsel.

As lawyers, once we have a sense of the emotional state of our client, we need to understand the root of that emotion. Is it business related, or personal in nature? Does it revolve around you and the advice you have given in the past and anticipation about what advice you might give now? Or, does it involve someone else in the business? What is the client’s relationship with that person? What is your relationship with that third person and with the client?

The most important aspect of the Salovey and Mayer model for you to consider is how to deal with the knowledge and insight you have gained into your client’s emotional state. This is the real test of your EQ. Those lawyers who are successful are able to make an accurate assessment of what they are dealing with and react with an approach that is complementary to the given situation.

My friend Jenifer Robbins, General Counsel at FPL Advisory Group, summed up lawyers’ EQ in one word – “Empathy”. The ability to relate to your client on an emotional level is absolutely essential for the successful corporate attorney and business person.

As you approach your daily activities, take a moment to think about those with whom you are interacting and try to gauge their emotional state, think about why they might be feeling the way they do, and take into consideration their perspectives and emotional state as you interact with them.

“Human behavior flows from three main sources: desire, emotion, and knowledge”

Plato

Listen

“We are given two ears, but only one mouth. This is because God knew that listening was twice as hard as talking.”

Unknown

Lawyers are taught to listen.  Good lawyers actually do listen.  But many of us are too busy thinking about what we are going to say next to actually listen carefully to what our partner in conversation is saying and the meaning behind the words.  Lawyers spend countless hours honing their writing and verbal skills.  However, being an excellent lawyer and a great business leader require exceptional listening skills.  People admire other people who listen to them, more so than the big talker in the room who believes that what he has to say is more important than what anyone else can possibly add to the conversation (or at least he acts this way).  Becoming a good listener will help you advance your career.  So what does it take to be a good listener?

Concentrate.  Good listening requires the listener to put aside all distractions and focus on the language, words and non-verbal cues the speaker is giving to you.  Focus on the words, the ideas and the feelings the speaker is expressing. Concentrate on the main ideas and points, try not to be distracted by off topic meanderings.

Pay attention.  Pay attention to the speaker, let her know that you are listening by acting like a listener.  All the while that you are assessing her communication with you (words, interpreting voice inflection and modulation, reading body language and facial expressions) she is doing the same.  She is looking at you trying to determine if what she is saying resonates with you, if you understand it, if the words “touch” your emotions or break through to your intellect.  Let her know that you are listening by maintaining eye contact, giving non-verbal cues such as nodding or leaning forward, look her in the eyes and let her feel that you “hear and you understand” what she is saying to you.

Maintain a receptive body posture – do not cross arms and legs or sit turned away from the speaker.  Rather, sit with arms gently to your side or slightly folded hands on your lap.  Do not play with your personal communication device – if necessary, turn it off in front of the speaker, sending a message that nothing is more important than what she has to say to you right now.

Be open.  Maybe, just maybe, the speaker will have something to say to you that you don’t already know.  If you have an attitude of objective receptiveness, she might convince you of a different and better way of thinking about a particular topic or a novel (to you anyway) means to approach a problem.  As lawyers, this can prove exceptionally difficult because we are often expected to have all the answers.  So we start to act as if we do.  It is amazing what we can learn when we accept that we do not have the answer for every problem and then listen carefully with an open mind to those who might have a deeper knowledge on a particular subject.

Restate the message the speaker gives you.  In this manner, you show that you are listening very carefully and that you have a desire to know exactly what she is trying to communicate to you.  Many times repeating the message in your own words gives rise to clarification or further development of the communication such that both parties benefit from a deeper dive into the subject matter.  Also, ask questions.  If you do not understand a point, or require further refinement, ask for clarification.

Do not interrupt.  You may think you can say it better than the speaker, but interrupting sends a clear unequivocal message that you believe what you have to say is much more important, relevant or insightful than what the speaker is saying.  Otherwise, why would you need to put an end to their message to get your own thoughts verbalized?

Put yourself in the speaker’s position so that you really have a better perspective as to where she is coming from.  Context is extremely important in understanding a person’s message and the “why” behind the need for its expression.

Remember, a conversation takes at least two people – a speaker and a listener.  Each party flips from one to the other in an instant.  For productive, meaningful conversations to take place, we cannot be thinking only about what we are going to say next.  We must exercise good listening skills to fully engage and learn the most we can from the conversation and hopefully, advance the cause of both the listener and the speaker.

“If you love to listen you will gain knowledge, and if you pay attention you will become wise.” 

Sirach 6:33

Mentoring: The Key to a Bright Future*

Mentor: a wise and trusted counselor or teacher; an influential senior sponsor or supporter.

The definition of mentor certainly lends itself to my perception of what a good lawyer should be — wise (of course), a counselor and certainly influential. So then, as lawyers in positions of influence, should we not devote some amount of our precious time to mentoring young people who express an interest in the law? How do we create a pipeline of good, honest, ethical, smart and intelligent lawyers to take our place when our time is done? We take advantage of our position today to ensure a future for our profession tomorrow. We teach. We mold students. We take advantage of opportunities to show them what lawyering is all about and guide them as they make decisions about their futures. According to Socrates, “The right way to begin is to pay attention to the young, and make them just as good as possible.”   

Lawyers from ACC’s Chicago Chapter participated in a mentoring opportunity this summer with the ACC Chicago Chapter Minority Law Student Summer Internship Program. The program, just completing its eighth year, serves the legal community in several ways: For one, the program places rising 2Ls in internship positions at top notch legal departments in the Chicago metro area, providing students with an invaluable, unique perspective into in-house practice that typically takes years to develop before one enters the coveted offices of the in-house world. Further, the program presents intense personal mentoring to each student regarding all aspects of what it means to be a professional — from interview skills, resume writing, proper attire and interpersonal skills (eye to eye contact, firm handshake, etc.). The students receive feedback and advice worth many years of real-world trial and error, because it comes from experienced people who have already made the mistakes. It also opens the eyes of many people to some of the challenges faced by minority students — challenges that they would not understand but for the relationship with the students. So, in that vein, the mentors may actually become more enlightened than the students as a result of their interactions. Lastly, it creates deep, lasting and meaningful relationships between mentors and mentees, and enhances the reputation of ACC and its members in the legal community.

I think we can all agree that mentoring young people is good for the legal community and the community at large, but what personal benefit will you receive as the result of your mentoring efforts?

First and foremost, you will be making the legal profession better, one person at a time. Mentoring provides you the opportunity to share your values with those entering the profession. We all have a responsibility to ensure our profession continues to maintain the highest ethical standards. Answers to questions the legal professional faces are often not clearly black or white — there is much more gray. Therefore, guidance based on one’s personal experience will help the uninitiated navigate the unknown, avoid mistakes that have been made by the mentor, and answer those questions with a much higher degree of confidence.

Mentoring is a wonderful way to build your own personal network while creating a lasting legacy that will exist beyond your professional life and that of your mentee’s. Part of mentoring is imbuing the mentee with a sense of responsibility to give back to the community. So, as your values are passed to your mentee, she too will pass those values on to her mentee, and so on down the line. Today’s mentees are tomorrow’s leaders, so not only will you have a higher degree of exposure to an emerging talent pool, but you will also be helping people who may one day be hiring people like you!

Mentoring enables you to practice your leadership skills and to receive honest feedback. The mentoring process should include the mentee providing feedback to you. Is she receiving your advice loud and clear? Are there any miscues in the way that you approach the process? How does your style fit with a younger generation of professional? How can you tailor your message or methodology to better communicate core values that are not generationally limited?

In addition to generational differences, you may also benefit from exposure to a young professional that may have a richly diverse background from your own (e.g., a different race, religion, personality style, economic background, national origin, citizenship, etc.). They are also excellent teachers in new media and technology trends, and they can help you improve your skill set.

“Mentoring brings us together — across generation, class, and often race — in a manner that forces us to acknowledge our interdependence, to appreciate, in Martin Luther King, Jr.’s words, that ‘we are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied to a single garment of destiny.’ In this way, mentoring enables us to participate in the essential but unfinished drama of reinventing community, while reaffirming that there is an important role for each of us in it.”
Marc Freedman, author of The Kindness of Strangers: Adult Mentors, Urban Youth, and the New Voluntarism

Let’s be honest, you will also feel good about yourself because you are helping someone else be successful. With relatively little investment on your part, you will have imparted a great deal of wisdom (presumably) and experience to a less sophisticated, but equally passionate, new or soon-to-be lawyer.

If you have an intern or mentee, legal or otherwise, take advantage of the opportunity to enhance the intern’s experience by giving her meaningful face time, and truly serving as a trusted guide and counselor. If you do not mentor someone, then start now. You will provide that person with knowledge drawn from valuable real-world experience that simply cannot be obtained in the classroom.

Finally, as in-house counsel, it is important that our communities know we are hard working, ethical, caring, responsible, enlightened and decent people. Tell your friends and neighbors about your mentoring activities. Let people know that lawyers continue to work hard to make the world a better place to live. You have another fine tangible example of good work to cite in the ACC Program, of how the legal profession reaches out to the community to improve it. It is a demonstrable example of the value system that we in-house lawyers hold true — opportunity, professionalism, ethics and mentoring.   Through this program, ACC Chicago is helping to make great lawyers who will be noticed. The community deserves to know that we are doing our part!

“The direction in which education starts a man will determine his future in life.” -Plato

*Note: this post first appeared on the Association of Corporate Counsel "In-house ACCess" webpage.  Click on the title to see original. 

On the lighter side — time to take a break

“It is our best work that God wants, not the dregs of our exhaustion. I think He must prefer quality to quantity”

Scottish Novelist George MacDonald

Every once on a while, we need to take a break from the pressure cooker at the office, take time to relax and refresh the mind.  Every good craftsman takes care of the tools in his tool box.  Just as the piano must be tuned to strike the right key and create the perfect tone and the lab instrument calibrated to take accurate measurements, so too must we take time to “recalibrate” our intellect.  The in-house lawyer’s tool is our brain.  A rested mind is essential to the fresh thinking required to solve problems for our clients and address our daily tasks with a smile.

Our mind has physical needs as well as psychological.  We must feed and rest our brain like we do for the other organs in our bodies.  A healthy diet is good for the body and spirit.  I concern myself here with the psychological care and feeding of the mind as it is not at all difficult for me to ensure that it is well fed physically!

Sometimes the mind itself resists the notion of downtime.  It is often difficult to find time to take rest.  We are busy people with “important” things to do.  We make good faith commitments to help others, only to find that we are overcommitted.  We have little time for our families and friends, let alone ourselves.  We work, we serve our communities on boards or service organizations, we mentor, we coach, we volunteer for this committee or that committee.  We often do so much that when we finally get home at the end of the day we fall exhausted onto the couch, motionless.  This is not healthy, nor does it allow us to perform at our highest level at any of these activities.

Fall is fast approaching and with it a less relaxed atmosphere around the office.  Fall is budget time and the approach of year-end.  School starts for the kids.  Fall seems to be the start of a myriad of activities that take us away from ourselves, it is a time when all those commitments start coming due.  So, if you have not yet taken some time off from the office this summer, do it soon.  Take a day here or there and relax on the porch, lay in the hammock, read that book that has been sitting on the nightstand for months.  Take some time for yourself to recharge and reenergize your mind.  You will think clearer, be more productive and just outright do a better job.  Your fresh approach to your job will make you happy and your positive attitude will rub off on your clients.

And don’t feel guilty about taking a little time for yourself.  Remember, even God rested on the seventh day!


“And on the seventh day God finished the work that He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all the work He had done.” 

Genesis 2:2

An Honorable Calling

“It takes many good deeds to build a good reputation, and only one bad one to lose it.”
– Benjamin Franklin

Practicing law is an  honorable calling.  Never ever forget that.  We are professionals duty bound to zealously represent our clients to the utmost of our ability.   Sometimes non-lawyers view lawyers as shifty characters who will go to any lengths to win a case.   I think this is because they don’t really understand how we work.  We make arguments that clients might not always understand.  We present the facts in a light most reasonable to the position that is favorable to our clients.  We posture.  We cajole.  We threaten.  We tear into people in search of the truth.  We often deal in unpleasantries. 

It is true - not many people are fond of lawyers as a group, until they need one. We sometimes then get the wink and knowing nod from the client, to demonstrate that they “understand” how we operate, they’ll play along and assume that we will take care of the dirty stuff outside of their presence.

Many clients do not understand that it is our sworn ethical obligation to represent them zealously, honestly and ethically.   I remember when I passed the bar some years back.  Someone sent me an article likening a new lawyer’s integrity to a brand spanking new shiny suit of armor.  The suit protects the lawyer’s untarnished reputation.   Each time the lawyer compromises his or her integrity, the armor is nicked, rust appears  corrupting the protective coating worn by the lawyer and eventually lays bare the vulnerable flesh beneath it.   This is an apt analogy don’t you think?

How many times have you encountered a lawyer that rarely does what he says he will do, cuts corners on advice, pads the bill a tad or fudges “just a little” on document production?  How do you view that lawyer when you next cross paths?   On the other hand, how many times have you encountered an adversary who behaves as the ultimate professional, who can be trusted not to take pot shots at you or use underhanded tactics to gain an edge?  At the end of the day, in which case does the client fare better?

Our jobs and our lives are complicated enough without having to negotiate the day (or the deal) worrying about whether or not the people with whom we are dealing can be trusted.  Whether with our adversaries or with our own clients, we have a responsibility to ourselves, to our clients and to our profession to be honest, to say what we mean, to do what we say, honor the profession, respect the law, do what is right and win.  How pleasant our professional lives are when we practice these principles and have them practiced on us.

So, polish up your suit of armor, strap it on for battle.  Shine for your clients and your profession.  Do the right thing.  Most of all protect your integrity, for at the end what does any one of us have left but our good name?