Advice for young in-house lawyers on explaining risk
While many lawyers have been taught how to identify risks, or issue spot, often lawyersparticularly young lawyershave trouble explaining risks with sufficient clarity to decision makers.
June 28, 2013 at 05:15 AM
9 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
In the second article of a three-part series focusing on young in-house lawyers (read part one here), this article provides specific strategies for successfully articulating and explaining the concept of risk.
While many lawyers have been taught how to identify risks, or issue spot, often lawyers—particularly young lawyers—have trouble explaining risks with sufficient clarity to decision makers. In particular, young lawyers need to internalize their company's appetite for risk, understand the different methods for explaining risk and provide diverse mitigation suggestions to their business colleagues.
Understand Your Company's Appetite for Risk
Depending on numerous factors such as market share, anticipated revenue and executive personality, a company will choose to accept different levels of risk. While this risk allocation will vary depending on the specifics of each deal or decision, a good attorney needs to take the time to gain a baseline of their company's appetite for risk from historic documents (i.e. internal memos, contracts and meeting minutes) and previous internal discussions with legal superiors. After internalizing this information, a young lawyer will be in a better position to recognize, leverage and capitalize on these reoccurring risk allocation patterns. Ultimately, this knowledge will provide invaluable information about the company's culture, help anticipate similar risks in the future, and allow a young attorney to preemptively propose answers to difficult questions raised by business colleagues.
Methods of Explaining Risk
A comprehensive understanding of a company's risk allocation behavior produces limited value without the proficiency to articulate the identified risks to the appropriate decision makers. Therefore, not only does a successful young lawyer need to identify risk, but he or she must also be able to articulate this risk. However, because decision makers come from a diverse set of backgrounds, young lawyers need to learn how to effectively categorize risk, explain the consequences of risk provide practical advice on the probability of such risks actually materializing.
Risk also comes in many different flavors and varieties. There are monetary risks (price, liquidity, inflation, etc.), market risks, operational risks and numerous other subcategories of risk, each of which has different issues and concerns. Therefore, young lawyers need to learn how to adequately categorize potential risks. Not only will this categorization highlight the breadth and scope of each risk, it will also help simplify relevant examples of these risks and more easily allow the applicable consequences of such risks to be successfully mitigated through internal operational changes, policy changes, or numerous different types of contractual assurances or carve-outs.
Unfortunately, even if lawyers adequately categorize risks, explaining the concept of risk can be challenging. It involves explaining the probability of a negative occurrence actually arising based on a set of assumptions and vulnerabilities (both internal and external). While most individuals understand this general concept, explaining the nuances and subtleties associated with risk (typically over the phone or conceptually via email) can be difficult at best. Therefore, young lawyers should attempt to focus on consequences of these risks, including but not limited to:
- Worst case scenarios
- Financial implications
- Operational impact
- Administrative burden
By being able to categorize a relevant risk, and then adequately explain the associated consequences of that particular risk, a young lawyer will have the necessary information to advise his business colleagues. However, having this information is necessary, but not always sufficient to successfully advise decision makers. Because these business colleagues come from different backgrounds and support the company in several different ways, young attorneys need borrow a few concepts from creative writers and appropriately illustrate the risks at issue by using narratives, descriptions and analogies.
Provide Mitigation Suggestions
Having identified and explained a risk, a young lawyer should also be in a position to suggest mitigation strategies, such as operational or technical solutions to a specific problem. If done successfully, this will create unexpected value in the eyes of any executive team and create an opportunity to change a potentially deal killing “no,” into a “no, unless you do x, y, or z” situation. At the very least, suggesting mitigation strategies—even if potentially infeasible or cost prohibitive in your initial opinion—will open the door for subject matter experts to at least propose creative solutions.
Conclusion
Ultimately, in-house lawyers not only need to be able to spot risks, but also have the ability to explain these risks. While difficult, categorizing these risks, understanding their associated consequences and being able to provide mitigation suggestions can significantly simplify this inevitable requirement of being an in-house attorney.
In the second article of a three-part series focusing on young in-house lawyers (read part one here), this article provides specific strategies for successfully articulating and explaining the concept of risk.
While many lawyers have been taught how to identify risks, or issue spot, often lawyers—particularly young lawyers—have trouble explaining risks with sufficient clarity to decision makers. In particular, young lawyers need to internalize their company's appetite for risk, understand the different methods for explaining risk and provide diverse mitigation suggestions to their business colleagues.
Understand Your Company's Appetite for Risk
Depending on numerous factors such as market share, anticipated revenue and executive personality, a company will choose to accept different levels of risk. While this risk allocation will vary depending on the specifics of each deal or decision, a good attorney needs to take the time to gain a baseline of their company's appetite for risk from historic documents (i.e. internal memos, contracts and meeting minutes) and previous internal discussions with legal superiors. After internalizing this information, a young lawyer will be in a better position to recognize, leverage and capitalize on these reoccurring risk allocation patterns. Ultimately, this knowledge will provide invaluable information about the company's culture, help anticipate similar risks in the future, and allow a young attorney to preemptively propose answers to difficult questions raised by business colleagues.
Methods of Explaining Risk
A comprehensive understanding of a company's risk allocation behavior produces limited value without the proficiency to articulate the identified risks to the appropriate decision makers. Therefore, not only does a successful young lawyer need to identify risk, but he or she must also be able to articulate this risk. However, because decision makers come from a diverse set of backgrounds, young lawyers need to learn how to effectively categorize risk, explain the consequences of risk provide practical advice on the probability of such risks actually materializing.
Risk also comes in many different flavors and varieties. There are monetary risks (price, liquidity, inflation, etc.), market risks, operational risks and numerous other subcategories of risk, each of which has different issues and concerns. Therefore, young lawyers need to learn how to adequately categorize potential risks. Not only will this categorization highlight the breadth and scope of each risk, it will also help simplify relevant examples of these risks and more easily allow the applicable consequences of such risks to be successfully mitigated through internal operational changes, policy changes, or numerous different types of contractual assurances or carve-outs.
Unfortunately, even if lawyers adequately categorize risks, explaining the concept of risk can be challenging. It involves explaining the probability of a negative occurrence actually arising based on a set of assumptions and vulnerabilities (both internal and external). While most individuals understand this general concept, explaining the nuances and subtleties associated with risk (typically over the phone or conceptually via email) can be difficult at best. Therefore, young lawyers should attempt to focus on consequences of these risks, including but not limited to:
- Worst case scenarios
- Financial implications
- Operational impact
- Administrative burden
By being able to categorize a relevant risk, and then adequately explain the associated consequences of that particular risk, a young lawyer will have the necessary information to advise his business colleagues. However, having this information is necessary, but not always sufficient to successfully advise decision makers. Because these business colleagues come from different backgrounds and support the company in several different ways, young attorneys need borrow a few concepts from creative writers and appropriately illustrate the risks at issue by using narratives, descriptions and analogies.
Provide Mitigation Suggestions
Having identified and explained a risk, a young lawyer should also be in a position to suggest mitigation strategies, such as operational or technical solutions to a specific problem. If done successfully, this will create unexpected value in the eyes of any executive team and create an opportunity to change a potentially deal killing “no,” into a “no, unless you do x, y, or z” situation. At the very least, suggesting mitigation strategies—even if potentially infeasible or cost prohibitive in your initial opinion—will open the door for subject matter experts to at least propose creative solutions.
Conclusion
Ultimately, in-house lawyers not only need to be able to spot risks, but also have the ability to explain these risks. While difficult, categorizing these risks, understanding their associated consequences and being able to provide mitigation suggestions can significantly simplify this inevitable requirement of being an in-house attorney.
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
© 2025 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![Inside Track: Why Relentless Self-Promoters Need Not Apply for GC Posts Inside Track: Why Relentless Self-Promoters Need Not Apply for GC Posts](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/e8/60/53490ff942d6bba2528d5647e8c1/on-the-move-767x633.jpg)
Inside Track: Why Relentless Self-Promoters Need Not Apply for GC Posts
![Companies' Obsession With Soft Skills Has Made Prized GC Posts Even Harder to Land Companies' Obsession With Soft Skills Has Made Prized GC Posts Even Harder to Land](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/corpcounsel/contrib/content/uploads/sites/378/2023/04/Climbing-the-Corporate-Ladder-767x633.jpg)
Companies' Obsession With Soft Skills Has Made Prized GC Posts Even Harder to Land
4 minute read![Meta Workers Aren't of One Mind on Company's Retreat From DEI, Fact-Checking Meta Workers Aren't of One Mind on Company's Retreat From DEI, Fact-Checking](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/17/e1/e7117e22464c94524d382686d8bf/social-media-hearing-2024-040-767x633.jpg)
Meta Workers Aren't of One Mind on Company's Retreat From DEI, Fact-Checking
![Private Equity-Backed Medical Imaging Chain Hires CLO, Continuing C-Suite Makeover Private Equity-Backed Medical Imaging Chain Hires CLO, Continuing C-Suite Makeover](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/70/28/eec6100b43d687b2552a9acd1abd/chris-shea-chief-legal-officer-medquest.jpg)
Private Equity-Backed Medical Imaging Chain Hires CLO, Continuing C-Suite Makeover
Trending Stories
- 1FTX One Year Later: The Impact on Examiner Practice in Bankruptcy Courts
- 2Gen AI Legal Contract Startup Ivo Announces $16 Million Series A Funding Round
- 3DOJ's Flawed Thinking in Challenging HPE-Juniper Merger
- 4Annual Self-Check: Testing For Bias On The Bench
- 5'None of Us Like It': How Expedited Summer Associate Recruiting Affects Law Students and the Firms Hiring Them
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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