05.15.09
Posted in Technology at 4:44 pm by Jerri Johnson
All but gone are the days of getting the first glimpse of the plaintiff, plaintiff’s attorney, the percipient witnesses or investigating police officers at the time of the first deposition or court appearance. Thanks goes to our young colleagues. Within moments of mentioning a witness or assigning a matter to our MAs, I receive an email containing a screen shot of the plaintiff’s MySpace page, a photo of the plaintiff’s attorney from his firm’s website, or a photo of the investigating officer receiving a community service award, accompanied by the newspaper article confirming his credibility and experience. This information, pulled up and forwarded so quickly and effortlessly by your twenty-something associate, can be very valuable. Or at least, very interesting!
Permalink
04.06.09
Posted in Technology, Training, Hiring at 7:57 pm by Jerri Johnson
At a recent seminar for managing attorneys, I spent a good deal of time following the meeting chatting with and listening to the wisdom and opinions of several managing attorneys more seasoned than I. These people, formerly my superiors and bosses, are now my colleagues and peers, and somewhat surprisingly to me, they were asking my opinion and listening to what I had to say as well. Very often, as a young attorney, I had assumed that the “old guys” had little interest in meeting or listening to me because, well, I am female. (Hmmm, chip on my shoulder?) It had started to rain when I left the meeting, but I walked the half block back to my office without hurrying, with the unsettling, but slightly amused feeling that “I didn’t need to be a man to have the veteran attorneys listen to me…I just needed to be old!”
One attorney voiced his frustration over what he perceived and described as the “entitlement attitude” of the “millennium attorneys.” Of course I asked the obvious question just to be sure I understood correctly, and the attorney explained that he considered the “millennium attorney” to include those who passed the bar in 2000 or later, and truth be told, probably any year after 1998. I didn’t follow up regarding his reasoning or the seemingly arbitrary cut off, as it seemed that he was grouping those attorneys who had been practicing less than ten years into the group of ungrateful, privileged prima donna attorneys. Now, I didn’t say this, because I wanted him to tell me more about his analysis of and experience with the millennium attorneys, but I have a distinct recollection of similar statements bantered about regarding the law school graduates of 1989. And my guess is that if we could poll the managing attorneys of the jazz age, they would report that the youngsters admitted after 1950 or so “just didn’t seem to work as hard or care as much about the profession.” J
What interested me about what this gentleman had to say was not necessarily why he was disappointed in his new-ish associates, but rather, why he felt he, or for that matter, I, an estimated fifteen to twenty years his junior, were different in our formative years. As managing attorney at our firm, I wanted to hear, of course, what management methods and philosophies worked. And this next part is a little odd, but having recently spent three weeks in a jury trial with a “millennium attorney,” I felt that, perhaps, the epithet was unjustified, or at least overreaching. But like I said, I wanted to hear more. Maybe, as someone with twenty years of practice under my belt, I could understand both the millennium attorney and the dinosaur. (This is not, in ANY way, meant as an insult – the “dinosaurs” are what the veteran attorneys in the Los Angeles County Bar call their group, and I can’t help but smile every time I see one of their flyers or events.)
It was just as the attorney was relating his experience of young attorneys who were looking for more money, fewer hours, more interesting work, more autonomy, etc., (Honestly, who isn’t?) and as I was preparing a retort in defense of our remarkable, hard working and bright associates, that a concurring opinion emerged from an unexpected source! One of the other attorneys standing in our little group, who was closer to the first speaker’s age than to mine, opined that while he understood the disappointment we all, as managing and supervising attorneys, feel when an attorney leaves the firm for more money, he could not fault the departing attorney. The bottom line is that law school is EXPENSIVE and unless one has been blessed with a very wealthy and generous family, or has been the beneficiary of a rare, “full ride” scholarship inclusive of lodging, books, etc., your new associate is likely to have loan repayment obligations which, unquestionably, make an offer of more money nearly impossible to pass up, notwithstanding that the type of work, challenges or personalities may not be as attractive as those offered in your office. Frankly, I was a bit stunned that this had come the mouth of another member of our small discussion group, of which at forty-five, I was the youngest member.
It is sad, but true. While our millennium colleagues are enjoying being, in general, having more freedom, more energy and more choices than we, there is an inarguable down side to being the young, errand running, discovery answering, loan-repaying new associate. Student loans and living expenses weigh heavily, particularly if this period of time is the first time the attorney has lived “on her own,” renting her own apartment, buying her own car, and balancing her own expenses against her income. And although the associate may know that he or she is getting the best experience, in the most friendly environment with your firm, the offer of a fifty percent pay increase in exchange for sitting in the corner of the library for two years, or for attending three hundred depositions on the same issue but never asking a single question, is likely to appear “worth the sacrifice.” Ah, yes, I remember those times and choices. J If any young attorney were to ask my advice regarding the above described dilemma, I would caution strongly that, in my opinion, quality of life and enjoyment of your work are more important than an extra meal at a restaurant, mini vacation or paying off your loans a year sooner. I understand, however, that not everyone thinks and feels the same, and the options and realities are different for everyone. If taking the highest salary and paying off debt sooner is what one needs for peace of mind, no one can quarrel with that. And I understand that it is not necessarily because the attorney is a greedy, self important diva. These are attorneys; people with challenges, choices and career and life decisions to make, often at a very young age.
When the conversation came back around to me, I explained to my management seminar colleagues what a tremendous asset our MAs can be! I learned to type in the tenth grade, I stopped dictating things years ago, and I can attach and open electronic documents, but I am a dinosaur compared to the millennium attorneys. They all have Facebook or MySpace pages, and they can very quickly research your plaintiff, client, jurors and witnesses – invaluable during trial. Your MA will be able to create an Excel spreadsheet outlining the events of your case, and she will be able to put the thoughts and experience that is currently only in your head into a Powerpoint presentation. I do not mean to condone utilizing your gifted new associate as an audio visual technician, but litigators who can also put these bright ideas into electronic form, or a form that will assist the jury or other audience, most certainly brings something extra to the table. And with a good teacher and some experience, her skills will develop and she will become adept at putting the “whats” and “whys” of litigation and trial to work with her already honed “how to” skills.
No, they don’t know everything, and neither do we. And yes, some of each group gives the impression that they believe they are omniscient. But I would encourage managers who have become discouraged with the millennium attorneys to take a closer look at your MA, and allow a second chance. And if you are a “millennium attorney” reading this, take heart – in twenty to thirty years you will be muttering these same sentiments about the law school graduates of 2030!
Permalink
03.10.09
Posted in Networking, Hiring at 3:54 pm by Colette Magnetta
While some firms make a concerted effort to wine and dine their summer associates with extravagant outings and events, the summer associates aren’t usually crazy enough to believe this truly represents their future life at the firm. I never got the impression that summer associates choose between offers based on which firm offered the best extracurricular activities, but there are certainly reasons to offer some special treatment to those newest firm employees.
Last week, our firm’s law clerk and I attended a local conference put on by Defense Research Institute (www.dri.org). In addition to the substance of the seminars, our clerk had several opportunities to network with others in our field. At this early stage in her career, she is less likely to be concerned with seeking referral business and more likely seeking camaraderie or mentoring relationships. However, what occurred to me is that the networking, the activity itself, doesn’t really change that much even as her specific goals of the event evolve. These types of conferences and networking events are exactly the type she will participate in if she joins the firm as an associate, and the more general goal of making and maintaining social/professional relationships remains. Furthermore, because we attended together, we were able to talk about the significance of the conference events each step of the way, and I could share our firm’s perspective and my experience on various topics as they arose.
Before any new hire, both sides always wish they knew exactly what they were getting into. Involving law clerks/summer associates in tasks and activities that will continue throughout their potential career at the firm is a great way for both sides to get a more accurate idea of what the future can hold. Our law clerk now has a broader view of the firm and its practice, while I was able to see how professional and engaged our law clerk was in a typical conference event. And frankly, the event was a lot of fun for both of us.
Permalink
02.02.09
Posted in Training, Tips at 8:02 pm by Colette Magnetta
This month, I encourage you to involve a variety of people in your firm’s client development activities, particularly to invite a newer associate(s) to join in.
Reason #1: fresh perspective. When you have been doing CD over a number of years, it is easy to fall into a rut, performing the same tasks over and over, and doing them in the same way. Internal CD meetings are a great place for brainstorming, and having new ideas is key. It is often the newer, younger associates that come up with or inspire novel approaches. For example, it was a younger member of our team that really rallied for updating our website and better utilizing trends in technology. This resulted in the development of a blog focused on e-discovery and this blog as well.
Reason #2: another person = more help.Years ago, our firm’s client development efforts fell essentially onto one person’s shoulders and therefore primarily consisted of sending semi-annual client gifts of food and taking clients to lunch or dinner if they were visiting from out of town. We have since evolved – in part because our managing attorney involved more attorneys. With more hands to help, not only do we come up with more ideas, we can accomplish more tasks. A great idea is wasted if there is no one to carry it out; fortunately, new associates are often the most eager to help.
Reason #3: longevity. As the firm ages, the associate gains litigation experience and develops relationships with clients, and if she has been involved in CD, she has also gained some of your CD wisdom and familiarity with the firm’s approach to and preferences in CD. She is now primed to take a leadership role in building and maintaining existing and new business, as the former leaders phase out. And your firm will live on.
Permalink
01.07.09
Posted in Training, Tips at 6:01 pm by Colette Magnetta
While this blog focuses primarily on training new attorneys, we call it developing new attorneys because there’s simply more to it than just training. Interaction with our associates in a variety of ways on a variety of projects fosters professional growth, inspires passion for a legal career and instills loyalty to the firm. A recent example of such a project comes to mind. I was invited by The Women’s Conference to submit a guest blog entry on its website promoting women’s empowerment. It was not a firm-related project, but an associate nevertheless agreed to co-write with me. We decided to write complimentary entries on mentoring by a female attorney and mentoring of a female attorney (to be published soon). The project itself forced us to talk about the firm’s mentoring system and how it affects us as women, and in turn get to know each other better. I find that the attorneys who interact in a variety of ways then work together more enjoyably and effectively. We feel fortunate to have this bright associate at our firm, and we want her to feel fortunate as well – I believe some non-file activity can add a sense of enrichment, whether a joint speaking engagement, playing on a firm softball team, attending a professional conference, or happy hour. If associates find their time at the firm stimulating and fulfilling, you’re likely to keep associates content and productive and keep turnover low.
Permalink
12.01.08
Posted in Training, Tips at 6:54 pm by Colette Magnetta
I recently attended a seminar by Emory Law School professor Timothy Terrell on persuasive legal writing at a defense attorneys’ conference (http://dri.org –2008 Annual Meeting). It was a terrific presentation; Terrell offered a focused analysis on persuasion and specifically tailored, motion writing strategies. I originally planned to write a blog entry simply reminding other supervising attorneys to continually improve their own skills so their growth does not plateau. However, a seemingly tangential point of Terrell’s really stood out and I believe is worth sharing.
Terrell noted that in editing another attorney’s writing, there is a tendency to focus heavily on grammar, spelling, punctuation and minor stylistic suggestions. I must confess I have been guilty of this myself. Just as a misspelling or run-on sentence can distract a reader from the paper’s substantive argument, grammatical editing sometimes distracts me from my goal of teaching an associate how to effectively persuade through writing. Terrell’s point reminded me that our time is limited, and just as we prioritize our work in general, we should also prioritize our feedback to and training of new associates. This may result in sharing less of your knowledge in particular areas and more in others. That’s alright – the new associate is likely to have other sources of training available for those less significant lessons.
Don’t get me wrong: Grammar and spelling are not unimportant aspects of writing; they simply aren’t as important as how well the paper persuades its reader. Feedback on an associate’s writing should reflect this priority. Similarly, developing good relationships within the firm, maintaining a strong reputation in the legal community, building a respectable resume, and reaching out to potential clients are important aspects of one’s practice, but the substantive work is the priority; time training new associates in these areas should be allocated accordingly.
Permalink
10.03.08
Posted in Tips at 2:47 pm by Jerri Johnson
In addition to providing training and instructions to new attorneys on preparing pleadings, taking depositions, and preparing for trial, the supervising attorney must guide the associate through all areas of the practice. Several years ago, two weeks after my daughter was born, I was working from home responding to written discovery on a relatively new case. In response to my request for an extension in light of my limited time, I received from the plaintiff’s attorney one of the nastiest, most caustic “meet and confer” letters I had ever seen. I immediately went to the state bar website to find out who this attorney was, and as it turned out, his bar membership was approximately the same age as my daughter. I thought it odd that he could be so rigid, and angry after such a short time practicing law.
Too often, brand new attorneys equate being rude with being effective or tough, when most of the time, just the opposite is true. Because the instinctive attitude of new attorneys is to take a hard line on every issue, it is the responsibility of the supervisor to stop this behavior, and to teach the attorney, by explanation and example, when a rigid, hard line is necessary, and when the client’s interests will be better served by granting a favor to the opposition. In most situations, unless your opposing counsel is among the most unscrupulous of attorneys, granting an extension, allowing a last minute cancelation of a deposition, etc. will leave a “debt” owed from your opposing counsel to you, which is likely to come in handy before the case is over. Additionally, you are very likely, even in Los Angeles, to run into that same attorney again in the future.
I tell all of our new associates to start every letter to opposing counsel with “thank you.” This is always possible. “Thank you for your offer to produce your witness…,”(even if the offer was for a date when counsel knows you will be in trial,) “Thank you for responding to our request for an extension,” or simply, “Thank you for your correspondence of yesterday declining our request to….” You can always think of something. Moreover, if you are in a discovery or other type of dispute with opposing counsel, there is a very good chance your letter will end up as Exhibit A to a motion or opposition, and the judge will be reading it. It is a good idea to make it as cordial as possible, and the first sentence will be the first part the judge reads. One more example: many years ago, one particularly offensive opposing counsel faxed demanding, accusing, name-calling letters to us nearly every day. The new associate working with me wanted desperately to write back and in addition to stating our position on whatever the substantive issue was, and also to point out to the attorney that he was wrong and also offensive. The associate and I had a long talk, and I told her everything I said above about starting with “thank you,” etc. Sure enough, when plaintiff eventually brought a discovery motion in which he accused us of, well, everything, and requested sanctions against us, we submitted a declaration in which we attached approximately twenty of his outrageous, accusatory, ill tempered letters and also our four or five calm, reasonable, agreeable letters. The judge carefully read all of the moving and opposing papers, ruled in our favor, and sanctioned our opposing counsel.
Permalink
09.24.08
Posted in Training, Tips at 10:58 am by Colette Magnetta
Our firm recently hired a new associate. I was eager to provide him with good examples of typical litigation work and initially provided a few from within the office. However, the nature of litigation requires we work with other counsel, and as each has his own style, I have found that their work can serve as additional examples. Quite interestingly, some of the most useful examples have not necessarily been what I consider the best work. Rather, it is the variety of practice styles and decisions of other attorneys that can serve as the best catalysts to discuss the reasons things are done as they are - the why factor. For example, we recently received a mediation brief from another party. Why did this party choose to share its brief rather than keeping it confidential? Why did it provide facts which support an opposing argument? Why didn’t it include certain exhibits? In discussing these issues, some of the examples provide clever models to follow (or at least consider), and others illustrate pitfalls to avoid. Whether the discussion of another party’s work relates to a writing, negotiation in mediation, the use of experts, or questioning in deposition, I try to make the discussion with the new associate productive by including the apparent goal, that is, why the attorney probably chose to approach the work in that style, my opinion on effectiveness, and anything I would do differently and why. While I still believe the most important aspect of training is the focus on the associate’s own work, the work of others, examples of both good and bad, can really illustrate the lessons I try to teach – or, in other words, any example can be a good (useful) example.
Permalink
09.03.08
Posted in Training, Hiring at 3:34 pm by Colette Magnetta
Training the new associate may not formally begin before the associate has accepted the position, but the interview presents an opprtunity to start the attorney’s development off on the right foot. By discussing the firm’s mentoring philosophy and describing how training is carried out to all the attorneys interviews, any candidate who accepts your offer is already primed with a sense of what to expect and what is expected. For example, I often tell applicants that we seek someone who is assertive and takes a proactive role in their own training. I note for illustration the distinction between an associate who simply asks, “What do I do next?” with one who suggests the next step and asks for feedback, between the associate who waits to be asked to do a task with one who assumes responsibility for all tasks. I also discuss our system of assigning two-attorneys per file: while the senior attorney offers a lot of supervision, guidance and feedback, associates are immediately given responsibility of their files. I point out that our training is not as formalized and structured as larger firms, but we offer a flexible, personalized training with a lot of hands-on learning. Although such discussions are meant to help make hiring decisions, we have found a secondary benefit – upon hire, the new associates are already instilled with an attitude of active participation in the training and mentoring process and have a higher comfort level with our training system.
Permalink
08.11.08
Posted in Training, Hiring at 11:53 am by Colette Magnetta
Although this blog is primarily focused on training, the interview process is so important in terms of developing strong new attorneys that we will briefly discuss it in the next two entries.
Traditionally, firms are conditioned to seek the best candidate and candidates to seek the best job. Our firm discourages this way of thinking and instead asks the attorneys conducting interviews, as well as the candidates, to look for the best match. With this in mind, our first step occurs before the interview: our firm takes a good look at what we have to offer and what our firm needs. It is only then that we can truly evaluate which applicants will fit best.
Then comes the interview. Every firm has been frustrated trying to get to know an interviewee who says whatever they think we want to hear. Just as we all would like applicants to be sincere in an interview, firms should also be upfront. For example, perhaps your firm is looking for a new attorney to work up cases, and more senior attorneys will actually take cases to trial, perform internal management functions and rainmaking. Tell the applicants in the interview, if not also in your advertisement. Some applicants find this focused responsibility appealing. And you are more likely to employ satisfied, fulfilled attorneys if you have been upfront about the nature and extent of job duties. Our small firm finds it more effective to have the various business responsibilities shared by all the attorneys. By discussing this with applicants in the interview, (1) each side makes a more informed decision - applicants who simply are not interested in trying a case to verdict or taking on client development responsibilities are less likely to accept an offer from us (or may even withdraw their applications), and (2) the associates hired tend to be more receptive to taking on these other responsibilities very early. Focusing on the interview as a time to “sell” the firm will likely lead to a higher number of interested candidates, but it is more difficult to identify which candidates really fit the firm and the position.
Furthermore, satisfied attorneys are less likely to leave the firm for another job, so that extra time in the interview process to candidly share information about the job and the firm can be viewed as a long-term investment.
Permalink
« Previous entries
