A successful legal department is like a hockey team
In-house counsel can take a lesson from the teamwork-heavy sport
July 30, 2012 at 08:00 PM
3 minute read
Earlier this summer, the senior leadership team at my company engaged in a series of team-building sessions. The results were phenomenal, in large part because each of the participating leaders was open to the exercises and committed to the ultimate goal of becoming a high-performing team.
As we worked on deconstructing and improving our collaboration and communication strategies, we found the sports analogies starting to flow, and we debated which was the most analogous to our corporate goals. Were we a track team, made up of individual pole-vaulters, distance runners and sprinters whose scores would aggregate for our overall team placement? Were we a baseball team, with players in the dugout, awaiting our turn to contribute to the team cause? Were we a football team, with separate offensive and defensive units, taking their turns for the common good?
As the spouse of a lifelong hockey player, it was clear to me that our values were best embodied by the continuity, fluidity and teamwork of an ice hockey team. In fact, whenever I talk about the five core values of my legal team—teamwork, client satisfaction, people management, work product and productivity—my spouse is always ready with a good hockey analogy that compares those same values.
- Teamwork. In hockey and in law, great players elevate the play of their teammates. When Wayne Gretzky was traded to the Los Angeles Kings, he consistently scored multiple goals per game, but on a team known for its earlier exits in the playoffs. Yet Gretzky's true greatness was manifested through the mentoring and focus on “team first” that ultimately helped transform the Kings into a team that was able to reach the Stanley Cup finals.
- Client satisfaction. The client should always have faith that its team is not only capable of solving and preventing problems, but also willing to put forth the necessary effort to do so. Hockey fans (clients) buy tickets to games and premium cable channels with the expectation that their team is capable of winning. Consistent losses, especially those due to sloppy play, erode fan support and manifest in lost revenue. If clients are not satisfied with their internal legal team, they may sidestep potential legal issues or, worse, make decisions without consulting their in-house lawyers.
- People management. A good coach or manager sets the team up for success by playing to the strengths and weaknesses of each player and promoting a culture of collective responsibility. Do you have the right players on the ice in the right situations? Does each individual player value an assist as highly as a goal scored? The objective has to be to win as a team, regardless of the role each teammate has to assume.
- Work product. While the goalie may play brilliantly the entire game, the only recorded statistic is the summation of each time he and his defense were scored upon by the offense. It is crucial for your team to always produce the best possible work product because in the law, a single breakdown can lose the game and be used by people to make future decisions.
- Productivity. A hockey game consists of 60 minutes of playing time. On a typical team, each forward player trains for years, yet depending upon his role, has bursts of ice time (shifts) totaling 12 to 20 minutes of playing time per game to demonstrate his abilities. Similarly, lawyers spend a lifetime honing a skill set that ultimately will be measured in small subsets of bigger projects. Productivity throughout preparation and execution is crucial. Without it, neither the lawyer nor the player will have the tools to deliver during those precious minutes of game time.
Janice Block is executive vice president, general counsel and chief compliance officer for Kaplan Inc.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'The Show Must Go On': Solo-GC-of-Year Kevin Colby Pulls Off Perpetual Juggling Act
Contract Software Unicorn Ironclad Hires Former Pinterest Lawyer as GC
2 minute readHow Amy Harris Leverages Diversity to Give UMB Financial a Competitive Edge
5 minute readAuditor Finds 'Significant Deficiency' in FTC Accounting to Tune of $7M
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250