The Biggest Mistake Lawyers Make in Their Approach to Networking
The thought of it for most lawyers gives them a major headache. I'd like to call it something else like "relationship building" or "professional connecting." Because that's what effective networking really is.
November 13, 2019 at 04:15 PM
3 minute read
Julie Q. Brush, Solutus founding partner.A: First, let me say that I'm not a big fan of the word "networking." When I think of this word, it conjures up the image of a big convention center or other big room with lots of people meandering around staring at each other's nametags. Nothing really happening, totally ineffective, a lot of after-meeting frustration. And the thought of it for most lawyers gives them a major headache. I'd like to call it something else like "relationship building" or "professional connecting." Because that's what effective networking really is.
Which leads me to the biggest mistake lawyers make in their approach to this task: It is the erroneous belief about what "networking/professional connecting" is all about and what you should accomplish from it. The vast majority of lawyers think about it as the following: What can I get? How can this person help me? Can this person hire me as outside counsel? What can this person do for me? Who can this person introduce me to? Can this person get me a job?
Me. Me. Me. Me. Me.
This content has been archived.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
Build It and They Will Come: Tips to Market Your Practice as a Junior Attorney
6 minute read
Yelp Sues Google for Alleged Antitrust Violations, Citing Previous 'Watershed' Government Ruling
There's Something in the Water: San Diego Is Once Again a Hot Market for National Law Firms
6 minute read
What Happens When You Go Viral? How a Law Firm Associate Manages Her Social Media Success
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 2Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 3Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
- 4Husch Blackwell, Foley Among Law Firms Opening Southeast Offices This Year
- 5In Lawsuit, Ex-Google Employee Says Company’s Layoffs Targeted Parents and Others on Leave
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
