In-House Counsel: Become a 'Yes, And' Businessperson in the New Year
Whatever word we use to describe what you do for a living, however, here is what nonlawyer clients tend to hear: NO. At many companies, the prevailing view of the law department is still a hybrid of traffic cop and bureaucrat.
January 08, 2019 at 02:55 PM
4 minute read
I debate the editor of my search firm's newsletter quite a bit over the following three words: lawyer, attorney and counselor. For no logical reason, I'm not a big fan of the word lawyer. In my mind, I picture billboard signs and ambulance chasers. Attorney feels more corporate to me, and so I lean on that one heavily in my writing. I like the idea of counselor, but it comes across as hokey or ambiguous whenever I attempt to actually use it.
Whatever word we use to describe what you do for a living, however, here is what nonlawyer clients tend to hear: NO. At many companies, the prevailing view of the law department is still a hybrid of traffic cop and bureaucrat.
At the rank and file level, law departments are often experienced as either a “cc” on an email or a painful trip to the principal's office. Two reasons: In-house counsel do, at times, have to play a buck stops here role on what a company can and cannot do (hello, FCPA compliance). But more often, it's because the legal mindset is “No, But.”
From law school to law firm, most of us were taught to question and persuade. Even in-house counsel usually come to a problem with the following mindset: “No, but” let me help you figure out a way to accomplish the business goal. Most corporate counsel think they are doing an exceptional job when they craft an effective “but” that moves a project forward.
I proffer a New Year's suggestion for in-house counsel in 2019: Give “Yes, And” a try. It's the increasingly popular backbone concept from improvisation classes and it's simple. Adapt a mindset of agreement. (Disclosure: I credit improv for changing my life years ago. I went from argumentative control freak to good listener and a happier person.) In improv, even the most foolish and least funny ideas are explored for a moment in time to see where they might lead. Sometimes the tire gets kicked, everyone yawns and the scene ends. But on occasion, comic gold is created. Either way, the potential is explored.
When your clients include you in strategy or business development meetings (and they should, more on that in a moment), do not think of yourself as a lawyer. First and foremost, you are a businessperson who shares the same objective as everyone else in that room. So that when a new product or concept or system is proposed, you can collaborate as follows: “Yes.” “And,” let me figure out the best way to support it from a legal standpoint.
You are not outside counsel or a law professor or a cog in a corporate wheel. You are a businessperson. That is likely what drew you to going in-house in the first place. I wish I could replace whatever title is on your business card and insert that one instead. Resist the temptation to play lawyer right away. Make it clear to your clients that your role is to help, collaborate and even add your ideas on how to grow or improve the business. When they really see and believe that, you will get access to meetings and conversations that will make you more effective and visible. The goal is to make sure no one is sitting there asking, “Why is the lawyer in the room?”
Mike Evers recruits attorneys for corporate legal departments throughout the United States. Visit www.everslegal.com. His firm also offers experienced in-house counsel to companies on an adjunct basis.
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 AllA Blueprint for Targeted Enhancements to Corporate Compliance Programs
7 minute readThree Legal Technology Trends That Can Maximize Legal Team Efficiency and Productivity
Corporate Confidentiality Unlocked: Leveraging Common Interest Privilege for Effective Collaboration
11 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Giving Back to My Community as a PVLA Volunteer
- 2Civil Reservations: An Important Tool for New Jersey Courts and Criminal Defendants
- 3People in the News—Nov. 18, 2024—Hamburg Rubin, Offit Kurman
- 4How I Made Law Firm Leadership: 'Leaders Must Be Good Listeners,' Says Dan Summerlin of Woods Rogers
- 5Ballooning Workloads, Dearth of Advancement Opportunities Prime In-House Attorneys to Pull Exit Hatch
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