Lawyers in Business

Sector silos for in-house lawyers?

2007-07-02T12:39:00.000Z

There is no doubt that sector familiarity is something which every in-house lawyer needs to acquire. However it is a pity that so much weight seems to be placed on this by the recruiters. I believe that individuals and organisations can benefit hugely from experience gained in different sectors.
If you identify a sector in which you would like to work, put some effort into acquainting yourself with it - there is so much information available these days - and network with others (lawyers or business people) who already work in it. Build your business acumen and personal skills - they are good passports. Give some thought to how you fit in the generalist / specialist spectrum.
Take heart from appointments which show that the silos do not trap you in a sector for your entire career.
Contact me if you would like some more ideas on this subject.

Open plan working for in-house lawyers

2007-07-02T12:06:00.000Z

Some in-house lawyers (a minority I would say) enjoy working in an open plan environment, others hate it. I have come across legal departments who having been through the valley of open plan have succeeded in making the case to revert to separate offices, or shared by no more than 2 lawyers.

Most organisations apply a regime across the board and find it awkward to allow dispensations for particular functions. The primary arguments of preserving confidentiality and permitting concentration are often discounted as being overly precious or elitist. Actual layout, heights of any partitions and intensity of occupation make a big difference.

If you are working open plan, you do need to have a haven somewhere for concentrated work without distraction - especially reviewing and considering a document. If you are producing something, it is easier to shut out distractions.

One of the supposed advantages of open plan is ready communication amongst colleagues. I have come across departments where there is a lot of banter and others where you could hear a pin drop because nobody wants to disturb anyone else. Proximity of working is no guarantee of good communication - you need to work hard at it, whatever the office layout. A number of in-house lawyers thrive by being located in the hurly burly of a commercial team working in open plan - others regard such an environment as hellish.

Any views about open plan and successful ways of combatting or working with it?

Wish list for a head of legal?

2007-02-26T20:54:00.000Z

A couple of months ago a head of legal told me that her employer was seeking to dissuade her from accepting a job with another employer and had asked her to propose what personal development programmes would secure her retention. We shared the following ideas:

Funding and time off for MBA or equivalent
Participation in any management programme run for executives
Active memberships of professional associations
Membership of a network, such as the UK based CLO Programme
Attendance at a major international conference once a year

As she already reported to the CEO and attended board meetings, these were not on the wish list. However I did suggest that whilst the invitation had been in relation to personal development it might be appropriate to pursue the following if she felt there was inadequate commitment:

Legal risk management
Involvement of in-house legal in strategy definition
Buy in from management to ‘ownership’ of and responsibilities re legal risk
Support for proactive contribution from in-house lawyers
Adoption of blueprint for level of internal and external legal resource

Resources
Adequate support staff – ratio of 1:3 or better
Adequate training and development budget for legal team
Subscription for the team to an on-line service, such as PLC Law Dept
Support from HR for coherent remuneration packages for legal team

My thought was that whilst this did not relate to her personally, she would undoubtedly be the beneficiary of enhanced team performance.
In other contexts the issues of salary, bonus, equity, annual leave and a sabbatical might come into play!
Did we miss anything?

Title abuse?

2007-02-26T20:33:00.000Z

My heart sinks when I see a recruiter advertising a wonderful opportunity for a relatively inexperienced (used to be 2 -4 years PQE) lawyer to be General Counsel of a fast moving, fast growing company. General Counsel or General Dogsbody to deal with the stuff which the fast movers do not want to do themselves nor pay outside lawyers to do? I'm sure that there are exceptions, but I have met quite a number of successful appointees who are at the end of their tethers - expected to be expert in all areas and no internal support. Character forming, but not great.
I also have some misgivings about multiple general counsel titles in the one organisation.

All in-house counsel should aspire to make the same contribution as general counsel - sound legal advice and persuasive business acumen - but is title abuse a good idea?

IT packages for in-house departments

2007-02-26T19:48:00.000Z

I am interested in charting the progress and experience of small to medium size in-house departments in using IT packages for matter management / work in progress / contract management. Not long ago there was very little available. Whilst a number of vendors claimed to have in-house variants of what had been developed for law firms, they tended to be over complicated and required customisation which added to costs.
Homespun solutions have been available in the form of spreadsheets or database applications such as Microsoft's Excel and Access. Packages for in-house departments based on them have been developed by Lex Australia. I am not aware of any European outlets.
In conversations with heads of legal, a couple of vendors have received favourable mentions - Amicus Attorney and Iken.
Ascertus have brought to my attention that they provide solutions all sizes of department, not just the large ones.
Any helpful (and non-actionable) comments welcome.