Author: National Law Forum

A group of in-house attorneys developed the National Law Review on-line edition to create an easy to use resource to capture legal trends and news as they first start to emerge. We were looking for a better way to organize, vet and easily retrieve all the updates that were being sent to us on a daily basis.In the process, we’ve become one of the highest volume business law websites in the U.S. Today, the National Law Review’s seasoned editors screen and classify breaking news and analysis authored by recognized legal professionals and our own journalists. There is no log in to access the database and new articles are added hourly. The National Law Review revolutionized legal publication in 1888 and this cutting-edge tradition continues today.

Are You Calling, E-mailing or Texting Employees While They Drive? You May Want to Reconsider.

National Law Review Guest Blogger David Carr discusses the every day issue of communicating with employees while they’re driving with a colorful fact pattern.

A recent court decision involving particularly bizarre circumstances may signal a warning of importance to employers about not so bizarre business practices. Prudent employers will take heed.

At first blush, the case of Buchanan v. Vowell appears to have no bearing on any significant employment law issue. Jerry Buchanan, the plaintiff, brought suit as a pedestrian who was hit by a car operated by the defendant, Candice Vowell. However, Buchanan also sued Candice Vowell’s mother, Shannon Vowell. (Other facts involve the Vowells’ consumption of alcohol and Shannon Vowell’s employment with Brad’s Gold Club.) The key facts generated the question of whether Shannon Vowell possessed liability for the unfortunate accident that occurred when Candice Vowell struck Buchanan with her vehicle after leaving Brad’s Gold Club. Brad’s Gold Club also found itself a defendant in the resulting lawsuit. However, the importance of this case arises not from the potential liability of Brad’s Gold Club. Presumably, most employers know about the dangers of serving alcohol to an employee and the attendant liability that arises if an intoxicated employee leaves an employer party or event and injures someone. If this proposition constituted all the case stood for, no novel issue exists.

Instead, what makes this case important and novel is the question of the liability of Shannon Vowell. The issue in question revolves around whether Shannon Vowell possessed liability for the injuries suffered by virtue of Candice Vowell’s striking Buchanan with her car. How could liability exist?

It turns out Shannon and Candice Vowell consumed alcohol together at Brad’s Gold Club and Shannon Vowell determined that, upon leaving, rather than call a cab or have Candice Vowell ride as a passenger in Shannon Vowell’s car, the two would traverse the streets of Indianapolis in two vehicles with Candice Vowell leading and Shannon Vowell following. At the time of the accident, Shannon Vowell was following Candice Vowell in a separate vehicle, and was engaging Candice Vowell in a conversation on a cell phone. Under these facts, could Shannon Vowell be found liable?

Buchanan alleged that, at the time of the accident, Shannon Vowell knew Candice Vowell was operating her vehicle while intoxicated and knew, or should have known, that talking on her cell phone would further impair or distract Candice Vowell, making her even more dangerous to other persons using the streets. Buchanan further alleged that Shannon Vowell “negligently made the affirmative, conscious effort to call Candice Vowell, distracting her from maintaining a proper lookout.”

In determining Shannon Vowell’s liability, the court looked at the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 324(a) which provides “one who undertakes, gratuitously or for consideration, to render services to another which he should recognize as necessary for the protection of a third party or his things, is subject to liability to the third person for physical harm resulting from his failure to exercise a reasonable care to protect his undertaking, if (a) his failure to exercise reasonable care increases the risk of such harm or (b) he has undertaken a duty to perform a duty owed by the other to the third person or (c) the harm is suffered because of reliance of the other or the third person upon the undertaking.”

The trial court chose to dismiss Shannon Vowell as a defendant. The Court of Appeals reversed and found that Shannon Vowell had acted in a negligent fashion by communicating with Candice Vowell on her cell phone when she knew that Candice Vowell was driving a car. The Court concluded that Shannon Vowell, as an individual, may have breached her duty of reasonable care “by calling and distracting a person she knew was operating a vehicle . . . .”

Perhaps you now see the potential significance of this case. One suspects that every day supervisors call, e-mail or even text “mobile” employees in the act of driving. It certainly appears an avenue now opens for employers to be liable for any action that occurs while the employee attempts to drive and text or talk via cell phone with the employer. While such a ruling would require an extension of the precise holding of Buchanan v. Vowell due to the added element of consumption of alcohol, it does not appear to be a difficult stretch. Wise employers will consider this case and set specific standards and protocols for when employees should and should not use their cell phones and text in the course of operating a company vehicle or carrying out company duties.

About the Author:

David J. Carr is a partner in the Labor and Employment Law practice group of Ice Miller LLP, focusing his practice in the areas of litigation of employment contracts involving trade secrets, confidential information and covenants against competition, complex wage and hour law issues, employment discrimination, and personnel policies. Mr. Carr is a veteran labor negotiator and has handled numerous labor arbitrations, union avoidance and other collective bargaining matters in both the public and private sectors. He also has substantial experience representing employers in wrongful discharge lawsuits and employment discrimination investigations, including sexual harassment situations.

Phone: 317-236-5840

Email: david.carr@icemiller.com

Website: www.icemiller.com

Outgoing ABA President Carolyn Lamm Discusses Next Steps to Achieving a More Diverse Legal Profession

The Business of Law Guest Blogger this week at the National Law Review is Vera Djordjevich of Vault Inc. with an interview of outgoing ABA President Carolyn Lamm Discussing the Next Steps to Achieving a More Diverse Legal Profession.

On July 30, 2010, Vault and the Minority Corporate Counsel Association (MCCA) held their 5th Annual Legal Diversity Career Fair at the Renaissance Hotel in Washington, D.C. More than 1,000 law students and lateral associates registered for the event, where hiring partners and recruiters from some 30 law firms, government agencies and corporate law departments were on hand to meet with candidates, review their resumes, offer advice and answer questions.

The event kicked off with a special breakfast where Brian Dalton, Vault’s managing editor, unveiled the company’s 2011 Law Firm Diversity Rankings, the result of Vault’s annual Law Firm Associate Survey. Vault also honored the Top 20 law firms—led by this year’s overall winner, Carlton Fields—who were the most highly rated by their own associates for their commitment to hiring, retaining and promoting diverse attorneys.

The event’s lunch featured Carolyn Lamm, outgoing president of the American Bar Association and a partner at White & Case, as the keynote speaker. Recently named one of “Washington’s Most Influential Women Lawyers” by The National Law Journal, Ms. Lamm has, during her tenure as ABA president, established a Presidential Commission on Diversity as well as a Commission on the Impact of the Economic Crisis on the Profession and Legal Needs. On August 10, 2010, Ms. Lamm turns over the helm to President-Elect Stephen Zack, a partner at Boies, Schiller and Flexner and the first Hispanic American to serve as ABA president.

Before her address, Ms. Lamm sat down with me to discuss the state of diversity in law firms, highlight some of the ABA’s goals and initiatives, and forecast what a truly diverse profession will look like.

VAULT: How would you characterize the state of diversity in the legal profession today?

In a word: evolving. In 2009, the ABA conducted an extensive national assessment of the state of diversity in the legal profession, including hearings held around the United States—with practitioners, academics, corporate counsel—whose results were synthesized into a report, “Diversity in the Legal Profession: The Next Steps.” We found that, although our profession today is more diverse and inclusive, and has made significant advances, many obstacles to free and equal professional success remain. For example:

While women make up just over half of the U.S. population and half of the entering classes in law schools, they represent one third of the lawyer population, about 18 percent of law firm equity partners and 20 to 25 percent of the judiciary.
Racial and ethnic minorities make up approximately one third of the U.S. population, but they represent only 10 percent of the lawyer population, less than 16 percent of judges and 6 percent of equity partners.

These numbers do not nearly reflect the diverse range of talent in our profession. Our lack of diversity runs counter to the promise of fairness and equality that is our profession’s bedrock, depriving the community of a bench that reflects the community and of legal advice that is a product of diverse views.

VAULT: What are the principal challenges to increasing diversity at law firms?

First, through what are known as “pipeline programs,” we need to get more racial and ethnic minorities into law school. We must do all we can to encourage young people of all backgrounds that a career in the law can be fulfilling, and that we welcome them to the profession. Through educational and scholarship programs, we must make it easier for qualified people of diverse backgrounds to pursue legal careers.

Then, once people enter the profession, we must work on retention. An ABA report from the Commission on Women in the Profession, titled “Visible Invisibility: Women of Color in Law Firms,” revealed startling realities about the experiences of women of color, including anecdotal evidence that nearly half of women of color have been subjected to demeaning comments or other types of harassment while working at a private law firm (compared with only 2 percent of white men reporting the same experiences). A substantial number also report being passed over for desirable work assignments, being excluded from networking opportunities, and having received at least one unfair performance evaluation. These and other disparities allow us to better understand why women of color have a nearly 100 percent attrition rate from law firms at the end of eight years.

Another challenge facing law firms—especially those that have been addressing diversity issues for a while now—is to evolve from the traditional idea of diversity to understand and embrace inclusion. Diversity basically speaks to the numbers: proactively doing things to increase the numbers of diverse persons in the firm. While that is absolutely essential, it’s not enough. We now must focus on building inclusive work environments that demonstrate that we value diverse perspectives and understand how they benefit the organization overall.

VAULT: Has the current state of the economy further exacerbated these difficulties?

Yes. The ABA’s “The Next Steps” report found that the “recession is drying up monies for diversity initiatives and creating downsizing and cutbacks that may disproportionately and negatively affect lawyer diversity—thereby undoing the gains of past decades.”

The American Lawyer’s annual report on diversity confirmed the anecdotes that have been voiced throughout the legal community. Its 2010 Diversity Scorecard reported that for the first time in 10 years the proportion of lawyers of color has decreased, based on a survey of the country’s 200 largest firms. While big firms lost 6 percent of their attorneys between 2008 and 2009, they lost 9 percent of their minority lawyers. Some experts fear that this could be the start of a new downward trend, given a climate of slower law firm hiring, fewer African-American and Mexican-American law students, and law firm layoffs.

VAULT: Where are you seeing the most improvements?

Both the quantity and quality of pipeline diversity programs have improved in recent years. The ABA, in collaboration with the Law School Admission Council, has an online Pipeline Diversity Directory. In the past year, the number of entries in the directory has almost doubled and it now includes over 400 programs across the country that work to improve diversity in the educational pipeline to our profession, such as the judicial clerkship program.

Collaboration is another area of noted improvement. More firms, bar associations, law schools, corporate law departments and other groups are pooling their resources and building partnerships to address diversity and inclusion.

VAULT: Tell us about some of the ABA’s diversity initiatives and goals.

Nearly all entities throughout the ABA work to foster greater diversity in the legal profession. The ABA’s Center for Racial and Ethnic Diversity is a centralized resource for many of these activities. Within the Diversity Center, there are three groups that each addresses a distinct area:

The Commission on Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Profession serves lawyers and judges in the legal profession;
The Coalition on Racial and Ethnic Justice addresses social justice issues; and
The Council for Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Educational Pipeline deals with pipeline diversity matters.

In addition, the Commission on Women in the Profession works to secure the full and equal participation of women in the ABA, the legal profession and the justice system. The Commission on Mental and Physical Disability Law addresses disability-related public policy, disability law, and the professional needs of lawyers and law students with disabilities. The Commission on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity seeks to secure for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons full and equal access to and participation in the ABA, the legal profession and the justice system.

This year I appointed a Presidential Commission on Diversity, which produced the “Next Steps” monograph. The report gives recommendations for next steps to increase diversity in the different sectors of the legal profession, recognizing the different challenges within each one: law firms and corporations, the judiciary and government, law schools and the academy, and bar associations. The commission is working with the ABA’s existing efforts to provide practical resources and guidance for women lawyers, lawyers of color, disabled lawyers, and lawyers of differing sexual orientations and gender identities to help pierce the glass ceiling. Central to the commission’s efforts is a series of distance-learning CLE programs to help diverse lawyers advance their legal careers. The programs are available on the ABA website as podcasts.

VAULT: What do you think about the reporting of diversity metrics and rankings, such as the Vault/MCCA Diversity Survey and Vault’s Diversity Rankings, as a means of encouraging law firms to step up their commitment to hiring, retaining and promoting diverse attorneys?

It can be an effective tool if it is used properly and in conjunction with other tools and incentives, and if it is transparently done. If reporting on diversity metrics or rankings is used only to prod and push law firms to engage in diversity efforts, those efforts will not be sustainable. But we must know the statistics in order to know where we are and where to devote resources in order to move forward. If we can help more firms understand the value diversity brings to every aspect of their operations, metrics and rankings will become a welcome opportunity to showcase how well they are doing with hiring, retention and promotion of diverse attorneys.

VAULT: How do diversity-focused events like this career fair help advance diversity objectives?

So much of hiring involves networking and word-of-mouth referrals—hardly just help wanted ads. In such a difficult job market, it is great to bring excellent candidates together with organizations that want to hire from diverse candidate pools. It’s important for employees and employers to get out there, network and explore career options—face to face whenever possible. Events such as these are especially useful when employers are hiring out of a regular recruiting schedule. But even if such leads don’t lead directly to job placements, they form the basis of career exploration and ideas that can, and do, produce results.

VAULT: What will success look like?

A diverse profession that reflects our community. A diverse legal profession is more just, productive and intelligent, because diversity often leads to better questions, analyses, processes and solutions. We are committed to see a Supreme Court that reflects our population and a profession in which each lawyer, no matter what their gender, racial or ethnic background, sexual orientation or disability, has the opportunity to achieve all they are capable of.

The only way we will see success is if our profession is a true reflection of our communities—even if it’s one person in one position at a time.

About the Author:

Vera Djordjevich

Senior Law Editor, Vault.com

Vera Djordjevich is senior law editor at Vault.com, where one of her areas of focus is diversity in the legal profession. She oversees the research and publication of information about law firm diversity initiatives and metrics for the Vault/MCCA Law Firm Diversity Database. She also edits Vault.com’s content related to law practice in the UK and co-authors Vault’s law blog, which provides career news, advice and intelligence to the legal community. publicity@vault.com 212-366-4212 www.vault.com

What are the Possible Legal Implications of the Passage of California’s Proposition 19?

The National Law Review’s featured blogger Donna Bader discusses the legal implications of legalizing marijuana in California.

As the November election approaches in California, the proponents and opponents of Proposition 19 are preparing for battle. Proposition 19, also known as the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010, is an initiative to legalize certain marijuana-related activities. It purports to do the following:

Allow people 21 years of age or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use;
Permit local governments to regulate and tax commercial production and sale of marijuana;
Prohibit people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using it in public, and smoking it while minors are present or providing it to anyone under 21; and
Maintain current prohibitions against driving a vehicle while impaired.

(See http://www.taxcannabis.org/index.php/pages/initiative/ for the text of Proposition 19.)

The findings in the initiative make fascinating reading because the initiative acknowledges that laws criminalizing cannabis have failed, millions are using it, and the percentage of citizens using it is double that of the percentage of citizens using in the Netherlands, which allows the sale of cannabis. In essence, criminalization has had no effect on usage. The findings also note that cannabis has fewer side effects than alcohol or cigarettes, California wastes millions in trying to enforce laws against it, and its illegality has spawned an illegal drug trade that makes over a $15 billion in California a year. It does not ignore the fact that that money in the form of taxes and permits could then go to the cities, counties, and states.

While the initiative addressing the implementation of a “legal regulatory framework,” certain activities are left to the cities. For instance, if a city decides not to tax and regulate the sale of cannabis, then buying and selling – not possessing and consuming – would remain illegal. If the city decides it is willing to tax and regulate the buying and selling of cannabis, then it must implement “a strictly controlled legal system” to oversee and regulate cultivation, distribution and sales, including relating how much cannabis can be bought and sold. It would also allow the California Legislature to adopt a “statewide regulatory system for a commercial cannabis industry.” The initiative proposes a number of activities that a local government may regulate. Finally, it permits amendment either by a subsequent initiative or statute “but only to further the purposes of the Act.”

The supporters of Proposition 19 seem to fall into two general camps: The first camp includes those who would like to use cannabis and see it be available to others, possibly because they believe it to be harmless, no different than alcohol (with less damage to the body), and that the criminalizing it has not worked. The second camp is composed of individuals who do not use cannabis and are generally not in favor of its use, but they too recognize the war on drugs and failed, and given the critical financial condition of our State, would welcome a thriving business that would put money into government coffers.

Two major questions arise from passage of Proposition 19. The first question is what will the federal government do? Possession of marijuana is still illegal under the federal Controlled Substances Act. The Obama Administration has seemingly turned a blind eye to prosecuting the little guy, but passage of Proposition 19 will dramatically increase the commercial and business opportunities to produce and sell marijuana. The bigger the business, the more attention it will receive from the DEA. Because the proposition covers commercial production and sale, the federal government may intervene and attempt to enjoin enactment of the measure.

The second question is how will passage of Proposition 19 affect other areas of law. Here are just a few areas that could be affected:

Counties and cities will have to scramble to make decisions on where they stand and how they want to regulate cannabis under the law.
The impact on interstate commerce because one can easily imagine what will happen if legal marijuana is purchased here and then brought over the border into a state that forbids it.
Dealing with taxing authorities.
Attorney ethical concerns in advising a client about activities that are still considered illegal under federal law.
Land use issues and restrictions.
Anti-discrimination laws.
Employment laws, particularly in the areas of drug-testing and wrongful termination.
Landlord-issues, including a revisions of leases and rental agreements to cover marijuana use, both personally and commercially.
Criminal convictions and the effect of Proposition 19 on pending criminal cases.
Insurance law, particularly homeowners and health insurance.
Impact on federal funding in specific areas touched by Proposition 19.

If the criminalization of marijuana has provided full-time for certain lawyers, then certainly the passage of Proposition 19 will present new and different opportunities for other lawyers as everyone tries to resolve the issues raised by its implementation.

Donna Bader is a Certified Specialist in Appellate Law in Laguna Beach, California. For over thirty years, she has specialized in handling civil writs and appeals, and has written more than 350 appellate briefs. Donna is the former editor in chief of several legal publications, including Plaintiff, The Advocate, The Forum, and The Gavel. She is the author of Rutter’s Civil Litigation Guide, California Summary Judgment and Related Termination Motions. Donna is also a frequent lecturer and contributing writer for various legal organizations. Donna’s blog, AnAppealtoReason.com, is written for California trial attorneys and advises them on how they can protect their appeals at the trial court level. 949-494-7455 / www.AnAppealtoReason.com

For Health Care / HR Professionals ASHHRA's 46th Annual Conference & Expo Sept. 25-28 in Tampa, FL

For Health Care – HR Professionals – the National Law Review wants to remind you that the Advanced Registration Discount date in August 25th for the 46th Annual ASHHRA Conference in Tampa, FL. The conference runs from September 25th – 28th. For more info: http://dld.bz/rBN8

National Association of Women Lawyers® Issues Statement Regarding Appointment of Supreme Court Associate Justice Elena Kagan

Chicago, August 5, 2010 — The National Association of Women Lawyers® (NAWL) applauds President Obama’s appointment of Associate Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan following the Senate’s confirmation on Thursday. NAWL’s Committee for the Evaluation of Supreme Court Nominees previously found Solicitor General Elena Kagan “well-qualified” for the position of Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Committee Co-Chair, Patricia Lee Refo, in testimony submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee in support of the confirmation, stated:

“The Committee is confident that General Kagan will approach cases and controversies with a mind that is open to all perspectives and with an appreciation of the professional and societal difficulties encountered by women and minorities.”

NAWL President Dorian Denburg says, “Solicitor General Kagan’s intellect is second to none, her judgment superb, and her perspective a judicious mix of scholarship and common sense. For all of these reasons, NAWL is confident she will be an effective Supreme Court Justice. With Kagan’s confirmation, progress is being made on the longstanding disparity in the representation of women on our highest court. While we must continue our efforts to eliminate persistent barriers that hinder the retention and promotion of women attorneys, today is a very good day and everyone should stop and take notice.”

NAWL’s Committee for the Evaluation of Supreme Court Nominees reviews and evaluates the qualifications of each Presidential nominee to the United States Supreme Court with an emphasis on laws and decisions regarding women’s rights or that have a special impact on women. Members of the Committee are appointed by the President of NAWL and include a distinguished array of law professors, appellate practitioners and lawyers concentrating in litigation, with diverse backgrounds from around the country and who work in a variety of professional settings.

The National Association of Women Lawyers (NAWL) is the leading national voluntary organization devoted to the interests of women lawyers and women’s rights. Founded over 100 years ago, NAWL has historically served as an educational forum and an active voice for the concerns of women in the legal profession. www.NAWL.org

Companies with in-house marketing departments handle a growing variety of projects these days. At some point, though, the workload often becomes overbearing. So, when is a good time to consider an outside firm to outsource work to?

When corporate budgets are tight, and time and resources are limited – that’s really the perfect time to contract work out. Here’s why:

1. MARKETING AND COMMUNICATION PLANS – An agency will help develop sophisticated marketing and communication plans for businesses that define and promote sales and marketing opportunities for the company, increasing ROI. Plans provide reports that map out results. They take into account an important aspect that is most often overlooked in companies — strategic marketing — and plan for the implementation and integration of marketing tactics.

2. TARGET AUDIENCE – Agencies can help enhance the definition of a company’s target audience because they look at businesses from an outside perspective. While a company may know an audience already through a metric such as sales reports, an agency can go in-depth to research and define not only who they are, but also how better to target them with results that work, creating a higher ROI.

3. NETWORKED IN THE COMMUNITY – Most likely, a local agency will be well-networked in the community, an added benefit for their clients. Agencies should be familiar with local news and media, for public relations and advertising purposes, and know what tactics work best for each part of your communication strategy. They also work with a variety of community vendors, which leads to the next point…

4. PRICING AND RESOURCES – Outside agencies may be able to negotiate better pricing on service and materials (such as stock photos and printing services) than in-house marketing departments. They have established relationships with a wide array of vendors which allows for price shopping and high quality.

5. CREATIVITY can be greater when a company’s marketing team works in tandem with an agency. In fact, most companies believe that the quality of work is much better. In-house marketing departments can often get too comfortable with products – losing their creative appeal. Outside agencies will have a fresh outlook and new ideas. They can also act as a catalyst for change by offering a different perspective on a myriad of issues.

6. WORK HIRED UNDER CONTRACT will be accompanied by a legally-binding agreement ensuring that roles and responsibilities are defined, ideas are well-crafted, and costs are calculated in the appropriate areas – which can be difficult for internal departments to determine.

From Guest Blogger Laura Powers of Furia Rubel Communications, Inc. Laura Powers is a marketing strategist with a history of developing award-winning campaigns that create continuity of brand, Web, print and promotion. Laura understands how design and image components fit within comprehensive marketing programs – building brands and their affinities. Laura regularly manages a broad range of marketing and promotion collateral including interactive websites, annual reports, company catalogs, product and service brochures, capabilities, brand identity and correlating pieces, ongoing quarterly newsletters and e-marketing newsletters. 215-340-0480 www.furiarubel.com

The National Law Review is proud to be a media sponsor of the 3rd Annual Automotive Product Liability Conference in Chicago Sept. 22-23

The National Law Review is proud to be a media sponsor of the 3rd Annual Automotive Product Liability Conference in Chicago Sept. 22-23 – Sutton Place Hotel http://www.americanconference.com/Automotive.htm Entering priority service code NLR1795 on the registration form entitles you to a $400 discount. Kathy & Jennifer will be there from the National Law Review.

International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) Legal Technology Conference in Las Vegas August 22-26

The National Law Review suggests you look into attending the International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) Legal Technology Conference – Strategic Unity in Las Vegas August 22-26 Aria Resort http://conference.iltanet.org/

Diversity: a Core Value and a Strategic Investment

This Week’s National Law Review Business of Law Guest Blogger is Vera D j ordjevich, Senior Law Editor of Vault.com. Vera explains why diversity in the legal profession benefits everyone.

As the latest “Jobs & JDs” report from NALP makes clear, today’s lawyers face a challenging job market. Widespread layoffs, reduced summer programs and other recruitment-related cutbacks raise particular concern for those tracking diversity in the legal profession. Even before the recession, progress in this area, particularly at the law firm partnership level, had been slow; now, many worry that the economic fallout will have a disproportionate impact on attorneys of color and other under-represented minority groups.

It may be commonplace for employers to voice their support of a diverse workplace, but making diversity a reality rather than simply a refrain requires work, planning and, to some extent, money. When there’s less cash to go around, budgets for programs that ostensibly represent only a company’s conscience rather than its fiscal responsibility may be the first to shrink. However, diversity is not simply an ethical imperative, it is also a strategic endeavor. A company or law firm with a long-term strategy needs a well-rounded and able workforce to preserve and grow its business. The cultivation of talent, diverse in experience, culture and outlook, represents an investment in a firm’s future. It is not a distraction from, but a contribution to, a law firm’s fiscal health.

Moreover, if you look at both the tools that promote diversity and the effects that a diverse staff has on a work environment, it’s clear that they provide broad benefits to the business as a whole.

1. Retention and development tools benefit all associates

Naturally, law firms need to be strategic and focused in their spending. But some of the most successful measures when it comes to diversity require little, if any, extra spending — mentoring, monitoring the progress of attorneys, and ensuring they have equal access to significant opportunities and clients in order to move forward in their careers.

The real hurdles may be less financial than philosophical. The legal profession is famously slow to institute significant structural change and law firms in particular hew to traditional systems of hiring, advancement and compensation. But the inherent limitations in the up-or-out pyramid model, lockstep salary system and trial-by-fire training are coming to the surface as more legal professionals consider alternative frameworks for compensation, assignment, advancement and development — frameworks that are merit-based, but focused more on evaluating than judging, developing than criticizing.

While many of these new models are discussed specifically in the context of improving retention among minority and women attorneys, the truth is these approaches should help all lawyers succeed. Consider these examples:

Effective frameworks based on core competencies
Solid, practical training programs
High-quality mentoring, in which mentoring is treated as a valuable contribution to the firm rather than a pro-forma obligation
Regular and substantive feedback regarding performance and expectations, rather than cursory annual reviews that take associates by surprise and offer little guidance
Recognition that there can be more than one effective approach to a given task

These are tools that benefit all associates and, by extension, the firm itself. Having a cadre of confident, well-trained and high-performing lawyers should be every law firm’s goal.

2. Everyone shares the benefits of an inclusive culture

This Friday, Vault and MCCA will be holding their fifth annual Legal Diversity Career Fair, giving diverse law student and lateral candidates and legal employers an opportunity to meet. As a prelude to the fair, Vault will be hosting a special breakfast to announce its 2011 Law Firm Diversity Rankings and honor the law firms who were the most highly rated by their own associates for their commitment to hiring, retaining and promoting diverse attorneys.

It seems no coincidence that the law firms that receive high marks for their commitment to diversity in our annual Law Firm Associate Survey include many of the same firms that are rated highest for firm culture and professional development. Of the top 20 firms in overall diversity this year, more than half were also ranked among the best in firm culture and for formal training and/or informal training and mentoring.

As an associate at one of the top-ranking firms noted in response to our survey: “The firm makes a conscious effort to recruit attorneys from diverse backgrounds and experiences, and it makes for noticeably better, more well-rounded case teams. I am continually amazed and impressed by the experiences my colleagues bring to the table.”

A law firm that keeps minority and women lawyers challenged, engaged and optimistic about their careers likely offers a welcoming environment and professional development opportunities to all of its attorneys. Having a wide range of backgrounds, perspectives and insights represented among employees not only makes for a livelier, more interesting workplace, but it also produces better results.

Vera Djordjevich Senior Law Editor, Vault.com

How to Motivate Attorneys to Market

National Law Review Business of Law Guest Blogger Deborah Knupp of Akina Corporation provides some very helpful and specific tips on how to motivate attorneys to market.

The Essence of Motivation

Consider that what lies at the heart of many motivational techniques is often a proverbial “carrot” or a “stick”, externally presented by a person of authority in an effort to coerce behavior to a desired outcome. The “carrot – stick” continuum often manifests within law firms through monetary rewards (or not), primo assignments (or not), invitation to partnership (or not) and a measure of “protection” that ebbs and flows with the rising (or falling) tides of the marketplace. The biggest challenge for sustained motivation and momentum with the “carrot – stick” continuum is that it relies largely on managers to consistently keep the motivators present and to be consistent in the reward or consequence when behavior does or doesn’t align with expectations. In essence, “carrot – stick” is a highly management-dependent motivational technique.

A more effective motivation technique is one that emphasizes reflective, intrinsic motivators and places accountability for sustained motivation and momentum on the individual. With this approach, a manager’s job is to create a set of conditions whereby a person can be at their best and sustain energy and momentum to meet (or exceed) expectations. Self-motivation, as it is often referred, is generally the result of three things:

1) Effective training whereby the individual knows what to do

2) Effective coaching whereby the individual knows how to do what is being asked or expected

3) Regular encouragement that reinforces behavior, course corrects mistakes and supports progress in pursuit of the ultimate result

So the short answer to the big question, “How do you motivate attorneys to market?” lies within these three truths – training, coaching, and encouragement. Further, motivation to market begins with changing the marketing mindset from “marketing is a cheesy, arm-twisting, manipulative, unsavory, self-interested set of activities” to “marketing is about 1) building authentic relationships and 2) solving problems that should be solved even if it means temporarily suspending self-interest.” Or as my six-year old most recently said to me, “Mommy, you help people know how to be nice, make friends and share.”

Training – The What’s

Let’s begin with training. There are four key things attorneys should know before they embark upon a marketing effort:

1) They need to know their target markets. Target markets can consist of industries, types of business situations, specific buyer types or even specific company targets or contacts. Target markets should be selected based upon strengths, natural skills and genuine interest.

2) They need to have an authentic reason to market. If an attorney doesn’t have a good reason to pick up the phone and call, then the attorney should wait to call until there is an authentic reason. Attorneys should ask themselves – “If I was the person I’m about to call, why would I be interested in hearing from me?” Authentic reasons generally fall into one of three “IN” baskets – Invitations, Introductions, Information.

3) They need to have a message. If an attorney wants to be memorable, they need to be message ready with a Quick Pitch. A Quick Pitch answers the question, “what do you do?” with a response that answers the question, “the problem I solve for whom is ______”. People care about what we can do for them or others (not just the job title or practice group).

4) They need to choose marketing activities that are rooted in joy. For some, they would rather impale themselves with a sharp object than go to a networking event. For others, writing or speaking is the equivalent to watching paint dry. Attorneys need to choose marketing activities that are most likely to lead to authentic relationship building and position them as problem-solvers. For some, this is networking and helping people make connections. For others, this is becoming a subject matter expert, writing or speaking on thought leadership or advancing in a leadership position for a professional association.

Coaching – The How’s

Once an attorney knows what to do, there are four key things that provide the “how” for execution:

1) Prioritize prep/planning/strategy. Effective preparation suggests that we honor another’s time by caring enough to have a game plan designed to get to a clear destination. Key elements of preparation are having an objective for why we want to meet, preparing key messages to convey interest and value, know the discovery questions we will ask to deepen understanding and relationships and anticipate outcomes with potential definitive next steps. Preparation helps attorneys control the variables they can in an uncertain market place.

2) Utilize the Platinum Rule when asking questions. The Platinum Rule says do unto others as they would have done unto themselves or in more basic terms serve another’s interest first and your interests will be satisfied over time. The Platinum Rule gives attorneys a posture of service over self-interest. The best way to demonstrate credibility is to ask questions that demonstrate care and interest in another.

3) Utilize time-boxed follow-up to stay connected. Time-boxed follow-up is the opportunity to set definitive next steps in the moment. It’s saying “I’ll call you next Friday to set up lunch” or “I’ll reach back out to you in 6 months if we don’t connect again before then” versus leaving next steps open-ended or saying “we should do this again some time.” Definitive next steps give us the chance to demonstrate that we are our word.

4) Know how business really closes. There is no magic phrase or silver bullet to close business. There are however, 6 qualifiers that can be like silver bullets to close business. Business will generally close if there is 1) a legitimate problem, for which we have 2) a good fit solution and there is 3) a sense of urgency attached to the timeline to make decisions. We must 4) have access to the decision makers and their decision-making criteria, 5) expectations must be in alignment for the level of effort it will take to initiate a relationship or work with us and 6) there must be a budget that fits with our fee structure. When the prospect’s interests align with our 6 qualifiers, business has a way of closing itself.

Encouragement

One of the big reasons attorneys lack motivation (or sustained motivation) to market results is the lack of seeing tangible results (i.e. new business, new clients, etc.) quickly. As important as training and coaching are to equip attorneys, one of the largest success factors for motivation is regular, ongoing encouragement. Encouragement to celebrate when things are going well and encouragement to restore hope when it is difficult to see progress. Encouragement comes from what gets measured and what gets communicated. While it is appropriate to measure revenue results, measuring progress is vital to sustain momentum. Such progress might be advances in relationships and access to new opportunities. Lastly, regular verbal checkpoints, spot coaching and verbal recognition are some of the most powerful ways to encourage through communication.

Be nice, make friends and share. The motivation comes from within.

Deborah Knupp has worked globally with CEOs, executives, managing partners and attorneys as a coach and business executive for over 20 years. She has helped these leaders align their people systems and business objectives to create cultures based on the principles of accountability, integrity and authentic relationship building. Her work has focused on making the work environment a place where employees “want” to be; where clients “want” to buy; and, where leaders “want” to serve a bigger purpose in their communities and families. www.Akina.biz

As first appeared in the January/February 2010 edition of the “Administrators Advantage” the newsletter of the Chicago Chapter of Association of Legal Administrators.