Coaching in the Law Firm Setting

In the context of our rapidly changing global marketplace it is essential that young lawyers are trained to be flexible, adaptable, and prepared to take responsibility for their own learning and their own continuous personal and professional development. This places new responsibilities on organizations to build professional development environments which encourage individuals to take a more active role in articulating and striving toward selfdetermined learning goals. As a supplement to regularly scheduled training programs, coaching uses a variety of strategies and techniques to support individuals in reaching their own learning objectives as well as the objectives of the organization. 

There are some core characteristics that generally distinguish the role of a coach from the role of a mentor in a law firm:

• Coaching is a fairly short-term activity, but mentoring is an ongoing relationship that can last for a long period of time. Coaching generally has a set duration, while mentoring is more long-term and takes a broader view of the person;
• Coaching consists of one-to-one developmental discussions at work, while mentoring can be more informal advice-giving, guidance, or support. Coaching helps individuals move from where they are to where they want to be or need to be—to develop the individual;
• Coaching is generally not performed on the basis that the coach needs to have direct experience in any particular occupational role. On the other hand, a mentor is usually more experienced and qualified than the “mentee.” A coach does not have to be trained as a lawyer to coach a lawyer. Having practiced law does not necessarily qualify any individual to coach other lawyers;
• Coaching revolves around specific developmental areas/issues at work, while mentoring revolves more around developing the mentee professionally. Coaching focuses on improving performance and developing/enhancing individuals skills. Mentoring focuses on career and personal development.

Perspective on Sustainability

I’ve been thinking about sustainability lately, and what it means for my fellow humans and me.  When we talk about sustainability, we are talking about nothing less than longevity of human existence on this planet.  The exact scientific details can be argued to the smallest detail, but we can’t allow these miniscule details to obscure the larger picture.  The consumer culture that we have allowed to thrive is not conducive to the natural systems that keep us alive and healthy on this unique planet.  For too long we have denied the actual cost of products and goods.  Companies have externalized the costs; ignoring the damage to ecosystems, and the exploitation of both resources and peoples.  We, as consumers, must begin to realize that the natural systems have limits that we are quickly approaching.  There is a severe disconnect between the stuff that we have and the process in which it’s brought into our homes.  I recommend The Story of Stuff to investigate these issues further.  

David Orr, a professor at Oberlin College and social visionary, speaks to the need to internalize the actual costs of production.  A product created by factories that pollute should inherently cost more to us as consumers because companies have to pay for their pollution.  Products made in sweatshops shouldn’t be cheaper, they should be more expensive so the workers can be paid fairly and treated justly.  Perhaps there is a silver lining to this economic crisis, in that it is making us rethink the economic system.  The idea that if we aren’t growing, we are failing is outdated and needs to be tossed aside.  We need to find it within ourselves to limit the amount of stuff that we are creating and purchasing.  We need to realign our values.  The measure of our person is not defined by the amount of stuff we have; we should be defined by our actions, the amount of love we share, and the community we build.  

Orr wrote an essay on sustainability in which he admits that the issue of sustainability may not be solved for generations to come, but that action needs to begin today.  The need for a framework of possibility is paramount.  For me, the future begins with education.  When we teach our children to view the Earth as precious and finite, new solutions will arise.  When we teach them to see the true cost of things, we will begin to alter how we live on this planet.  These values have been lost but not forgotten; we just need to be reminded of our connection to the Earth rather than our connection to our stuff.

Orr's Sustainability Essay

                         -Liam Gallagher, M.S.Ed.

                            (Stephen's son)

Legal Profession in Transition

At the NALP Conference: It's the End of the World As We Know It

 Abovethelaw.com reported on a speech at the Annual Meeting of the Association of Law Placement (NALP) by law firm management guru James Jones -- Managing Director of Hildebrandt International, and former managing partner of Arnold & Porter.

 -- spoke to a packed ballroom about how the legal industry is, in short, completely screwed (at least for 2009, and probably beyond).

Jones did not need a crystal ball to predict that:

1. Pushing through rate increases will be tough.
2. Expect pain in moving from a period of never-ending growth to a focus on increased efficiency.
3. The way that law firms operate as businesses will change - more pain.
4. Firms will move to competency-based compensation models - at long last!
5. Staffing models will change. Expect to see a growth in other types of attorneys -- e.g., staff attorneys, counsel / senior counsel, and contract lawyers.
6. Expect to see an "unbundling" of legal services. We will begin to see top firms working alongside cheaper firms as co-counsel on the same case, or top firms offering less expensive services under the same roof.
7. Finally, expect to see a shift away from the billable hour model.

Related article

With the Downturn, It's Time to Rethink the Legal Profession [New York Times]

An anthropological introduction to YouTube

Professor Michael Wesch from Kansas State University discusses how communities are being formed on YouTube. This presentation was made before The Library of Congress on the June 23, 2008.

This is an excellent introduction to where social media is going.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPAO-lZ4_hU

Building Trust in a Relationship

Trust is defined as one party’s confidence in the other relationship member’s reliability, durability & integrity. It is each party's

belief that its actions are in the best interest of & will produce positive outcomes for the trusting party.

The basic units for measurement of trust can be divided into two components; rational (credibility & reliability) & non-rational (intimacy & orientation). The trust equation can be expressed as: Trust = (C+R+I)/S. Where “C” is for credibility or truthfulness, “R” is for reliability or predictability, “I” is for intimacy or integrity, and “S” is for self-orientation or self-consciousness.