Lawyers who Frolic, & Other Shuddery Thoughts (uggggh!)

Your JoeRecruiter got the weirdest call this not so long ago last week. A Beagle JoeR has no choice but to call Little Bunni FuFu (trust JoeRecruiter on this. . .if you met this Beagle, you would SO understand), called in a state of High Crisis.

After looking at not one, not two, not three, but many, many of the Law firm Recruiting Sites, the Beagle In Question was beside his/her Beagle Self (in the interest of confidentiality, and also because it's screamingly funny, JoeR can not, in good conscience and poor taste, disclose LBFF's Gender. But you can guess, and play along with Joe, right?)

It would appear that, in an effort to appear charmingly delightful, relevant, and, I don't know, maybe even chummy, the Law Foims are doing "Wedge of Life" videos and pics on their websites. And, yes, for the record, JoeRecruiter will, starting now, and henceforth, flip indiscriminately, and wildly, from first to third person at the drop of a, whatever, hat, trou, dangling participle. . . doesn't matter. Hell, drop of a glucose level, or even an area of a concentration curve, Joe isn't proud. Did ya see that? What I did just now. Right there? Like that. Be carefy. It could happen at any second.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand. Ugh! Makes Joe shuddah. Are you kidding me? Lawyers frolicking. Fun and games on the roof of a law firm? It's, why it's, it's unseemly, is what it is. By the way, can we just clear something up, for all y'all white people out there in lawyer-land? It's NOT freakin' Bocce BALL, it's just freakin' BOCCE. It IS a Bocce ball, in the same way that it's a Soccer ball , but that's like calling the game football ball or baseball ball. What is WRONG with you? I double-dog DARE you to go to South Philly and say, "Hey, youse, can I play a game of Bocce-Ball wit you?" on a Friday afternoon and make it out alive. I don't think it can be done, and I've done more than my share of South Philly, let me just say that and leave it there.

Little Bunni FuFu's fundamental problem, and I agree, is that the firms are selling the wrong dream, and, as much as Joe hates to agree, I'm afraid that I must. Let's face it, if you're a summer-slummer, yeah, they're gonna be nice to you, but who isn't nice to the (insert appropriate sleazy term here) they're (insert appropriate mechanical description here) during the summer? You're always nice to the summer-vacation-relation. It's a super-intense master-blaster.

It's REAL LUV. About to HAPPEN. No, really, I'm SERIOUS. I never felt this way about ANYONE before. I MEAN it! Um, you ARE taking something, though, right? Just in case it doesn't work out. Not that it wouldn't. I mean, I'm TOTALLY committed to YOU. I'm just saying.

But, eventually, you know, fall has fell, and then reality sets in, and then, well, the truth, she is HERE. Thank whatever (higher power, or whatever) you (believe and/or don't) in.

[Remember when you could just say "Thank God" and if someone didn't, they just went "whatEVER!" and rolled their eyes, and that was that? I miss those days!]

And then, the beatings start. Oh, sure, at first, they just use their hands. Of course, you like it, we all like it. But when they start using the dipolar metallic alloy clips and the batteries, of course, you have to say, "um, are we getting paid overtime for this, or what?" Whoops. Perhaps Joe is oversharing.

Here's the thing, and there's just no getting away from it. I don't want my lawyer to frolic. At least, not at work. Certainly not when I'm paying him, her, or them, a couple hundred dollars an hour.

As a client, I don't wanna see that. As a recruiter, I don't wanna see that. And as a potential employee (or whatever dumb ass term they're using this week), I don't wanna see that either. Not even as a summerfun intern hoop-de-hoo party monkey.

Hell, I don't wanna see pictures of it, even if I'm snorting cocaine off a hooker's butt. On the other hand, I paid good money for those negatives, so they better not show up in People magazine, or heads are gonna roll. Damn! Oversharing, again.

Love Your Recruiter,



JoeRecruiter

p.s. And always know the name of a good bail bondsman (bondsperson?). Again, I'm just saying.

http://joerecruiter.blogspot.com

Open or Closed-Why Comp Systems Are Like Your Fly

So, the discussion of Compensation Systems has once again reared up its uckin' fugly head, and, naturally, your big JoeRecruiter has to take a mean swipe at it. . .after all, it's kinda like Joe's Job. To punish the stupid. To poke at the ridiculous. And to take a big swipe at the Uckin' Fugly. What? Joe bitter? Perish the thought.

But stick with Joe for just one damn minute, Admiral, and let me explain myself. I won't mention names here, mostly because I don't have to. These persons, and I say that with reservations, these persons are already widely known, and so are their views, but let me just say that their philosophies are ALSO widely known, at least in some cases. Let me also say that their logic, while weak, and uninformed, is ALSO widely known. But a lot of what they're talking about they think only applies to Partner Compensation, as if ALL comp is NOT comp, but instead SOME comp is comp and some comp is NOT comp, which is not only stupid, but both stupid and untrue.

All compensation decisions, at the end of the day, affect the economic picture of the law firm at base, so, whether you pretend to yourself that there are two pots of money, one called Partner Money, and one called Associate Money; or three pots, Partner, Associate, and Other; or seven pots, Associate, Partner, Other, Mother, Snow White, Muffin, and Naughty Nurses, or whatever dumb ass scheme you've cooked up in your head, the truth of the matter is that, at the end of the day, or, at the very least, at the end of the money cycle, all of the money from whatever sources gets POURED into one very large pot, no matter how you track it, and it all gets divided up and split up according to whatever hare-brained scheme you've come up with.

Now, I get that certain individuals think, wrongly, that keeping all these numbers secret SEEMS like a good idea. Certain of these individuals, I suspect, care a helluva lot less about "preserving fairness" as they claim, than trying to make damn sure that nobody else finds out how much money they themselves are pulling down. But here's the thing. There's an old saying that a secret between three people is only a secret if two of them are dead, and I believe that to be true. I also believe that certain of these people would love to be able to arrange for the other two to be dead if it were within their power, but sadly, at least, most of the time, it is not.

The point, and your JoeR has one, is that, in virtually any case, it's going to be nigh on impossible to keep salary information secret. Oh, sure, you can try. You can try to keep your fifteen-year-old a virgin until she marries at the ripe old age of 25 too. Good luck with that. That's why, no matter what justification you use, no matter how GOOD it sounds, it's just, (how can Joe say this? Ah, yes . . .) never, never, frickin', ever gonna happen. Even if your name is Francisco de la Garza de la Chiquito de la Moros, or whatever the hell it is, and you are the Chairman with all power of the Largest BigLaw Of All, making pronouncements from on high. You know what, Jack? Save it.

You can pronounce until you're blue in the face, but internal power trumps pronouncements from on high, and you can't replace that with stock options, little man, so shut the hell up. The comp people, Legal Assistants, Secretaries, and others who actually do the work of law firms have information to trade, and until you can find them another, better substitute, or get them laid FAR more often than they do, you got nothin' to say. [For the record, Joe made the whole thing up. . .the actual law firm Joe is picking on is not the biggest law firm ever, but Joe wanted to make a point. . .geddit?]

The only solution. . .let me repeat that, for the hard of thinking. . . the only solution is to have an open, that is an open compensation system. Put it all out there. Hell, if it were me (and by the way, at one point, it was me, so I'm speaking from experience, thank you very much), I'd post the matrix, the rules, the guidelines, everything, in the damn cafeteria/breakroom, bathroom, whatever, so that everyone is on the same page, and everyone knows, to the dollar, what everyone else makes.

I know that about half of you are cringing, sinking back into your Herman Miller chairs, thinking to yourselves "I can't do that. . .they'll, they'll kill me!" And maybe they will. But only if your comp plan is uckfayed upyay. If it's fair. . .if it's really and truly fair, then you've nothing to worry about. Lawyers are jerks, and prima donnas, and sometimes not very nice, and they're even greedy, but, in the main, they are fair. Mostly. Usually. Okay. Sometimes.

But you don't have to care about that. You can BE fair, and, you know, screw them. They can be not fair on their own time. . .not your problem. And if that means you have to change your comp plan, then change the damn thing. I swear, it's not very complicated. And if they stamp they tiny feets and fuss and cuss, let 'em. Even the best lawyers can't leave overnight, and if their comp is so good that they don't want anyone else to know about it, it's too good to leave over.

And if they do want to leave, well, that's just damn good news for JoeR anyway, in two directions. And damn good news for the firm, too. It means you just lost a wimp-ass lawyer, and you can find someone with actual cojones. YAY! Everybody wins.

Post the information, and let the chips fall where they fall. It's a lot less hassle. You don't have to remember to lie to anybody. It weakens the Vulcan Death Grip that the Non-Lawyer Staff has on information flow in the firm, and it makes every single operation in the firm more transparent, believe it or don't. Now, for a while, the firm MP, Chair, or Busta Move Head Person will have to endure his/her share of screaming phone calls, that IS true.

Here is your Uncle Joe's Guaranteed Never-Fail Screaming Telephone Call Response (mostly to wives, but also to boyfriends/bitchy "partners"): "LulaBelle (or Name), you're right. Stan [not his real name] DOES make more than Jed [also not his real name]. But I'll make you a promise. As soon as Jed works as many hours, as hard, and as well, as Stan; does his job as well; and makes as few excuses as to why his work product isn't as good as Stan's, I'll put my enormous ass on the line to get Jed as much money as I'm paying Stan, maybe even more. And I'll tell you something else, darlin'. It might pay for you to use that lung power of yours on HIS ears as opposed to mine, because right now, you're screaming up the wrong tailpipe, if you take my meaning."

Yes, it's tasteless. Rude. Totally illegal in 55 of the 50 states (Joe is counting Texas, all of them). But it'll shut her the hell up. And that is what we want. And it'll focus her considerable powers on him. It's almost always a him. Husbands of Female attorneys don't seem to have these problems.

Let us recap, Joe and you. Closed comp systems, Bad. Open Comp systems, Good. Painful, but good. Joe means, Good. Screaming spouses, Bad. But funny. Spouses screaming at their lawyer lesser half. Good. And VERY funny.

Class Dismissed.



Love Your Recruiter!!!

Don't forget the lubricant.



JoeRecruiter.

Suck It. Imperative, Declarative, or Interrogatory? Discuss.

First of all, let's establish some ground rules. I won't be talking in third person much today. Takes too much time, and I ain't got that kind of time. Also, I'm bitter. How bitter you ask? Well, let me see. Double Asparagus, no celery for two weeks bitter, and musty bitter at that.

With respect to the typeface, let's just say that this decision was imposed on me by the good people at Blogspot. Thank you, good people at blogspot. Let's also remind ourselves that it is JUST past the SECOND anniversary of the first request for an internal spell-checker for postings for our blogs. In fairness, Joe was NOT the first to request a spell-checker, oh MY no.

So, why the bitterness? You are all, of course, familiar with the expression, evil and sexist tho it may be "Bros before, um, something something-O-S", right? For those of you pretending to be dumb, it means that your friend doesn't, um, "sock"-block you if you're out and you find you like someone and you decide to make a run for them, even if your friend ALSO thinks they're cute. You get first dibs.

AFTER you crash and burn, IF you're not too traumatized, and especially IF you decide you were too good for them, THEN your friend MAY ask for permission to approach. OF course, this only counts if your friend is NOT your wing-man. For the record, even if your friend is a girl, and she decides to go for the cutie, because that's the reason she rejected you [you should be so lucky], she is still referred to as a "wing-man" if that's what she was being when you went out. There is NO such thing as "wing-woman", just like there's no such thing as"dudette."

Anyway, Joe's friend broke the no approach rule, and Joe really REALLY dug the hottie. So Joe told the friend (who was NOT being a wing-man, but STILL) "we're done." And then silence ensued for many days, and Joe avoided all their places, and phone calls, and whatnot. Finally, just hours ago, ex-friend managed to trap Joe at a locale, and said "hey aren't you going to say anything to me?" and Joe, obligingly said, "Yeah. . . . suck it!", and that's how we ended up with the theme for this installment of the blog. Yay! Thank You ex-friend. For the record, I decided I'm too good for the cutie, anyway. I hope it was worth it.

Oddly enough, I didn't decide to relate this jumbled tale of pathos to you either to elicit sympathy or or to share with you my messed up life, but rather, I thought it sort of neatly paralleled the big hoo-hah with Associate Pay, Partner shifts, jealousy among the Mid-Associate ranks over associate pay hikes, and various and sundry other issues.

Let me see if I can make sense of this for you. Okay. I can't. No one can. It's a mess. No one can make sense of this for you. Because it's freakin' stupid. But I'll try to clear at least some of it up.

First of all, the Associate Pay Hikes fiasco. Everybody has talked about this. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY is listening. The firms know it's a game. Recruiters know it's a game. The Law Schools know it's a game. Even newly-minted and freshly scrubbed Associates know it's a game. So why do they do it? Because, everybody's trapped inside a feedback loop that they can't get out of. How can I explain this? I got it.

Remember the closing credits of the Jetsons when George goes out to walk Astro? Right. After Astro starts chasing that stupid cat and jumps OFF the treadmill, George is trapped on it, and can't get off, and it sucks him down under and around and around and around and around, and he yells for Jane to come and "stop this crazy thing!"? The Associate Pay Hike Game is George Jetson on the freakin' treadmill. Sadly firm MPs are either too unaware (not very bloody likely) or too proud (Mos' Def) to call for Jane to come help them, and stop this ccrazy thing.

For their part, the Associates rock it, because there's nothing that's better for a baby-lawyer than telling a potential conquest how much he makes, unless it's Ro-Hypnol, and that crap's not as easy to get as it once was, and, even when you have it, people are MUCH less trusting than they once were. . .these days, they take their drinks WITH them when they go potty. . . .or so Joe's heard.

Of course, Mid-level Associates, especially junior middles (the very WORST associates, the associates EVERYONE loves to hate, including clients, partners, MPs, recruiters, small children, and their pets, and most other forms of sentient life, including OTHER Mids), are LOVING this, because they see it as THEIR Ticket to Ride [the asses of partners, HR, EDs, their Mentors, and everybody else they haven't annoyed, tormented, or alienated . . . .yet). Granted, that's an excruciatingly small percentage of the population of the known universe, but they don't muchly care. . .a Mid's job is to torture, the same way a Mongoose's job is to attack a Cobra, and my Ex's job was to suck out my soul.

So now, there's another arrow in their liverish quiver. . .one more whine to gratingly apply to the ears of their friends, colleagues, and superiors. . .(imagine a scratchy tin horn playing in the background while one of Satan's minions plays a badly tuned violin and the evil Mid scratches his yellowish and perversely thick nails on a blackboard, while delivering this speech:)

"Since the new Associates are getting raises, and they haven't even DONE anything to deserve a raise, and since WE are the ones who do the all the work around here, don't you think it's appropriate to ask foR consideration for at least a SMALL increase in compensation during the next salary review period? After all, WE are the ones who train the new people, take on the majority of complex work that has to be done, and deal with the Senior staff as well. I mean, we do a LOT!" And so on and so FORTH. WHINE WHINE WHINE!!!!

Okay, that's all true, sort of. And yet, NOBODY CARES. Nobody. See what happens when even a Brown Recluse says to himself "Self, just walk away. You don't want any part of this. It's a MIDDY. You bite this guy, he'll poison YOU." Fortunately for them, most Mids work through this stage of their lives and become Seniors (for those not quite WITH the program, what I mean is Senior Associates, who are actually almost human, insofar as an Attorney CAN be considered a human, and I won't get into the discussion as to whether or not a lawyer IS considered to be still Human. Me, I vote yes, but then, I'm a legal recruiter. . .what the hell do I know?). Seniors are great. Almost Partners, absolutely not Mids. And they know more than newby Associates. If they were food (and for most BigLaws, they are) they would be a tasty snack.

Some out there in the quasi-real world have foolishly attributed the "jealousy" over beginning pay hikes to Seniors. Wrong. Mayhaps a few Mid-to-Seniors are unhappy. There are dummies in EVERY profession, we all know that. But, the truth of the matter is that the overwhelming percentage of the kvetching has come from the Mids. Even if I liked them, I'd still have to admit to this, and so would they.

In a few markets, it's true that Senior pay hasn't kept up, and it's ALSO true that SOME Seniors at SOME firms have been getting reamed for years on bonuses, but we ALL know who these people are, and we all know who these firms are, and if you're stupid enough to work for a firm like this, you get what you deserve.

Let me also say that these firms ALSO know who THEY are, and Lawyers are abandoning them like rats from a burning Spanish Galleon, as well they should, and if YOU are a law firm that knows WHY good lawyers are leaving you, and you don't have the sense to fix the problem, then you don't get to complain about it.

Joe hears this all the time. Joe READS about it all the time. And so does everybody else. Complain, complain, complain. Gripe, gripe, gripe. Moan, moan, moan. You know what? Shut the hell up! I mean it. I'm dead serious. You guys know what the problem is. You caused it. It's YOUR freakin' fault. You don't want to change anything, then DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING. But stop WHINING about what's wrong . Especially stop acting like a poor innocent VICTIM for pete's sake. Like you were just STANDING there, and then all this terrible stuff just sort of HAPPENED to you.

I swear, if I read ONE MORE ARTICLE about how Law Firms can't get attorneys to stay, how quality suffers, how there's no continuity, and how clients are beginning to feel abandoned, I may just climb to the top of the tallest tower in my home town, strip down to my jammies, and start shooting spitwads at passers-by. It's been a while, but I was pretty good there for a while with my wrist-rocket, and I don't care WHAT you say. . .paper is environmentally friendly.

So, class, what have we learned? Well, we've learned that Mids are ev. . .I mean, that Mids have a way to go. Partners rock. Law Firms are mostly victims of the problems that they cause themselves, and that spitwads are environmentally friendly. It has been a rich, and a full day.

Oh, and we learned about wing-men. Teach your wing-man. Make sure she has your back.

Love Your Recruiter!!



JoeRecruiter

The Perils of Pursuing Partner Perfection, or, Close Enough IS Close Enough!

So, as Joe is sure you can imagine, it's been an interesting couple of weeks. Joe has been on a junket. Not, not a Press Junket. Joe doesn't know what one of those is, but it sounds dirty, and therefore fun.

No, this was the mid-summer-bummer Dog and Pony Road Show, in Mind-Numbing Snooze-O-Color! Big YawnFest. Not for the firms, of course. They freakin' love it. Sorry, Joe means, uh, LOVE it! LOVE IT! YES~! Because they're freaks, man! Freakin' freaks. YES~! No, Joe kids. They're NOT freaks. The MPs are freakin' freaks. YES~!

To tell the truth, Joe is mostly bitter because Junior Partner has been somewhat less available than in the past. Truth be told, Junior Partner is almost about close to be nearby to becoming NOT-Junior Partner, which brings some ISSUES to the fore. We'll talk about this later.

What Joe wanted to share with you, noble readers, and what made Joe realize that MPs, and others of their ilk, are freakin' freaks, is a series of skull-crushing meetings during the dogandponyroadshow (as opposed to skull crushers during the workout, which Joe actually digs, don't ask why), when Joe realized that this particular episode of the blog was writing itself in Joe's fertile and massive brain. This often happens.

But what was particularly interesting (and also particularly irritating at the same time), was the combo Deja Vu and "bad taste in the mouth" feeling in virtually all of the "Meet and Greets" with all the MPs and/or Exec Committees (and sometimes both), especially when the conversation got around to Partner recruiting, partner development, building the firm in specific practice areas, bluh bluh bluh, you know the drill. . . .

Joe suddenly realized (okay, not suddenly. . .as Joe has said before, this eerie, creepy, slightly oozy, slimy feeling has been around for a while), that the problem is a HUGE disconnect. . .MPs don't get it. Partners don't get it. Law firms don't get it. Nobody don't get it. We're all missing something. Actually a lot of things. And we've been talking past one another for a long time, and we're getting worse at capturing the important details. Which makes it even worse.

So, Joe has decided to break it down for ya. Try to streamline it, and lay it out. Took Joe a while, but I think I have it distilled down to some of the things that everyone needs to know. Firms. Lawyers. Exec Committees. MPs. Evvabody else. Ready? Here we go.

Let Joe set this up for ya a little bit, 'kay? Everybody wants the best Attorneys, the best Partners, the best EVERYTHING, and they SAY they want the best environments, and they want to BE the best places to work, but they don't HAVE the best environments, or do the things that the best attorneys want. So. The list below reflects the wants, needs, and, inasmuch as it's possible, the best thinking about HOW to get everybody "on the same page" (Joe hates that expression) with respect to the recruitment process. It'll probably change a lot next week, but, for right now, here's the list, in no particular order:

1. Book Size: This one drives Joe crazy. YES, a book is important. YES, lawyers DO need to be able to creae business, and, YES, a lawyer SHOULD have HAD a reasonably big book at SOME point, but it doesn't HAVE to be today. Business EBBS and it FLOWS. A Million dollar book today means absolutely nothing for tomorrow despite what anybody thinks, and this isn't just Joe's opinion. . .there are dozens of studies demonstrating the same thing. Besides, a new envionment means different constraints on an individual lawyer's ability to generate business.

The most important limiting factor (or, more correctly, DE-limiting factor) is what kind of support the firm is willing to give the lawyer once he comes aboard. THAT is the number one predictor of success in business-building once a lawyer transitions, regardless of the size of their book at time of offer.

2. Scheduling and Work Options: Joe flat does not understand why this is an issue. Law firms are absolutely PACKED with the highest concentration of smart people of any organizational type in the country. Why law firm management can't figure out simple stuff like flexible scheduling, job-sharing, telecommuting, and other flexible work options is beyond his ability to fathom. SERIOUSLY. For an overwhelming majority of the tasks lawyers have to do, there is just NO good reason for them to BE in the office. Face time IS important, if someone actually NEEDS to see your face. But, for most of us, except for our weekly meetings, or a chance meeting on the way to the little professional's room, we're not going to meet up with anybody who needs to SEE our mug. Especially for some lawyers, greater flexibility with respect to spending time in the office could, and, by the way absolutely WOULD make the difference between going to work for a specific law firm, and declining to have the conversation.

Let Joe give you a real-life example. Client was LMNOP Law Firm. VERY good. VERY smart. Wanted to add a BUNCH of Lawyers. Had offices in several New England and Atlantic states. Only interested in the best and brightest, as you would be, right? Only problem. . .the commute to ONE office was particularly bad in one state. Joe beat those bushes like they were giving diamonds. Begged the Firm MP to let the attorney candidates telecommute, work from home, come in a few DAYS a week, anything to make the commute more palatable. . .nope, says the MP, nothin' doin'.

You know what happened. Joe found about a half-dozen lawyers who were actually SPECTACULAR. Multi-state admitted, huge books of business, top of their game, and willing to talk. But not willing to commute. Two even lived nearer one office than the office for which Joe was looking. Do you think the MP would let them work from THAT office? No way! For the record, Joe resigned the Client. The firm is still looking for lawyers.

The worst thing about it is that the primary reason behind NOT allowing for these options has nothing to do with saving money, or confidentiality, or legalities, or procedural issues, or operations, or anything else. It costs less; there are no concerns with confidentiality; privacy concerns are no greater than they are with in-office computers; in fact, they're almost exactly the same, especially with respect to server issues; and, with respect to procedures, again, transparent. No, it all has to do with ego. Specifically, with the ego of management.

Management wants lawyers where they can SEE them. Which is kind of stupid, actually. Because it's a helluva lot easier to monitor you on the computer than it is by walking past your office and looking at the back of your head. But managers, of most all types, want to be able to "see" you working. We still have this mentality that if I can't SEE that you're working, you're probably not working. . .this is why we still have lawyers that won't leave the office until AFTER their boss leaves. . .regardless of how early they get into the office themselves. It's crazy. But it sort of leads us into our next section, which is. . . .

3. Value Billing versus Billable Hours: Joe still doesn't understand why Law Firms even bother with hourly billing anymore. It's not just stupid. It's freakin' stupid. Don't think so? Take this test:

Me: From now on, I'd like you to pay me hourly whilst I'm looking for attorneys for you, m'kay?

You: Are you high? We only pay for results! You bring us a good attorney, we pay you.

Me: Yeah, but you expect other people to pay YOU for all the other work you do which has NOTHING to do with results, you know, like research and copying, and this and that. . . .

You: Yeah, but all of that stuff is necessary, in order for me to be successful at my job, and to GET the RESULTS.

Me: Yeah, me too.

ONE HOUR LATER. . . . .

Me: So, about that hourly billing thing?

You: Sorry, like I said, we only pay for results.

Me: [sigh]
.................................................................................................

Didja geddit?

As we noted above, Lawyers are really smart people. . .sometimes. But they're also herd animals sometimes too. Or they're just really comfortable doing the same things over again and again and again and again, or SOMEthing. Joe doesn't know. What Joe DOES know is that Lawyers DO have it within their power to bill on value and NOT bill on time.

Is it possible that you'll lose some of your clients over this decision? Yeah, it's possible. But the research shows pretty convincingly that once you start to value bill, you'll spend less actual "clock" time on individual matters, which means you'll be able to dispose of more total matters per calendar year, whether a small firm or a biglaw firm. More matters, more money; more money, more profit; more profit, bigger jet; bigger jet, better vacation; better vacation, better disposition; better disposition, better clients; better clients, more money; more money, more profit; and on and on and on.

Plus, Joe thinks (and so does the rest of the world, not counting lawyers), that hourly billing makes it LOOK like there's a temptation to overstaff and overbill, just to pump hours. Joe doesn't know any lawyer who would do such a thing, but it doesn't matter if you would or not. .that whole thing about avoiding the appearance and whatnot. . .Value Billing eliminates it instantly. It also eliminates the complaints (loud and crabby tho they may be) from many clients about the rising costs of associates, and over-reliance on associate billing, and associate time, and so on. Plus, it helps to minimize (sadly, it doesn't eliminate completely) the complaints that associates are being trained at client expense (this is a stupid argument, granted. . .ALL lawyers are trained at client expense. . .and all DOCTORS are trained at patient expense. . .it's called EXPERIENCE. . . .DUH! Joe fails to see the problem with this).

Again, and, not to beat a dead metaphor even worse, but. . .never mind, bad idea. But let us go back and talk about your trusty Surgeon. Or your trusty Dentist. Or your itty bitty Kitty's trusty Vet. Or any of your many other Licensed Professionals, other than Accountants, because Joe blames Accountants for this hourly billing nonsense. Even your trusty Seminar Guru has a price, whether her name is Lyla and she's so chirpy happy you want to punch her in the mouth just to see if she ALWAYS smiles, or his name is Federico and he's so "out of the box" and "empowered" you wonder if he's ever said anything in the past ten years that wasn't a metaphor. All of them have a standard price ("It's $10,000 a day, whether 10 people participate, or 100.").

Now granted, your Surgeon bills differently, probably. . .Joe suspects she doesn't give a flat rate for, say, five cholecystectomies, whether they're all the same day or not (although it might be worth finding out). Nevertheless, the point is still valid, if, by this point, beat into the ground. Value billing is the way to go. Otherwise, lawyers will end up working even LONGER hours for LESS money for NO good reason. There's one MORE good reason not to bill hourly (i.e. get PAID hourly). If flat rate pay is good enough for executives in these giant-super-mega-corporations, it should be good enough for lawyers. Joe can't prove it, but, in the place where, if he HAD a heart, his heart would be, Joe honestly believes that corporations and corporate types like hourly billing because it allows them to think of lawyers as "hourly workers," and that, by itself, is a good enough reason to abandon hourly billing.


4. Team Support: Lawyers like their teams, sometimes. But when a lawyer tells you that they want to bring their team with them, or asks if there will be suport for their team, there should be no hesitation, not even one minute's worth. . .it's either "yes" or "I'm sorry we couldn't find enough common ground, but I wish you well." There is no in-between. Now granted, some attorneys are going to want to raise the stakes in the negotiation, as well they should. Law Firms always act scandalized when lawyers ask for more than they got at their last firm. Why? It's a negotiation. They're SUPPOSED to ask for more. You're supposed to get them to want less, or tell them they have to work harder for it. That's the whole idea.

While we're on the subject, let Joe talk to potential job-movers for a little minute. You know, you don't have to get up on your high-horsey about every little thing. You MAY IN FACT be the best lawyer in the world. Joe doesn't care. Joe only deals with the BOB (Best of the Best) in the first place, so don't think Joe hasn't been down this road before. But you're still ASKING someone to hire you, even if THEY came to YOU (or even if JOE came to you), so be a LITTLE civilized. Not because you NEED to. . .clearly you don't. But you're trying to clear some ground for the transition period, and you WILL need the support of people inside the firm to help make you successful THERE, even if you have a Billion-Dollar book.

Joe has seen incredibly successful attorneys go down in flames, in less than a year, because they alienated their NEW firm at the gate. ESPECIALLY if you're a rainmaker already, you MUST charm, and disarm, all the people in your new home, from the receptionists all the way to the MP's Assistant, and beyond. But even if you're not looking, it never hurts to be civil.

With respect to the hiring firm, it's a simple enough proposition: Give as much support as you can, with REASONABLE boundaries. Give the marketing support. Find out what they were doing at the other firm. Did it work? Why or why not? Make it part of the offer, contingent on their succes at your firm. And don't pull the plug until someone OTHER THAN THE MP has a chance to review their efforts and success. And don't yank them off their plan and then expect them to meet the protocol you set up with them. If they're not working to plan because YOU screwed up the plan, that's YOUR fault.

5. Head 'em up, move 'em out: This one is self-explanatory, but it's a big, HUGE problem. It takes too damn long to make a hiring decision. This is what you have to do. ..all of you. Beg, borrow, steal, or, preferably, BUY a copy of "Blink" by Malcolm Gladwell, and read it, cover to cover. It will teach you about the power of immediate and powerful decision-making with short-context. Learn about the power of "thin-slicing." Then use it. The truth is, we don't make such good choices when we take longer at them. The research shows that there is, in fact, a slightly negative correlation to good decision-making with respect to hiring decisions overall. It sort of depends on the profession.

In the legal world however, the research demonstrates pretty clearly that the est hires, over time, are those that MPs and Hiring Committess "felt" were the ones they liked instantly, regardless of the time it took to eventually get them hired. In English, we're pretty good at "intuiting" (is that a word?) who is going to be successful inside our firms, no matter how long we eventually end up taking to hire them. Does that mean that Joe thinks we should just jettison the long, drawn out, painfully, carefully, slow and thoughtful hiring, vetting, and screening process? Oh, HELL yeah!

It's TOO cumbersome. It's a freakin' nightmare. And, NOBODY likes it. Plus, it has cost a LOT of law firms some really REALLY good candidates, and soured them, AND THEIR FRIENDS on those very same firms. This is not good. Not for the candidates. Not for the firms. Not for the profession. And, ABSOLUTELY, not for the Joes of the world.

Don't misunderstand, Joe knows that candidates drag they feets too. And that sucks bad. But Joe thinks this is symptomatic, i.e. it's because they know that the firms aren't in a hurry, so they drag their feet, because they know the firm's going to drag ITS feet. Joe thinks there should be some way to "fast track" the hiring process.

But there's even a more important reason to speed the process up, not just one of cost, or of irritation, or any of these secondary matters. It has to do with valuing the process. Lawyers (actually, any 'employee' for lack of a better term, at least in this context) attach significance to what they SEE management paying attention to. In other words, if management doesn't VALUE the hiring process, the lawyers won't see it as valuABLE, and it diminishes THEIR perceived VALUE.

It's kind of weird, but lawyers see themselves as important to management when they SEE that the management team sees the hiring process as important, because it's a DIRECT demonstration that the means of production (after all, lawyers ARE the means of production in a law firm) has significance and worth to those who are in a position to impact it. Don't try to figure it out; it doesn't have to make sense for it to be true, but it IS true.

The bottom line is this: When management lollygags around and drags its feet, it not only hurts the firm and costs it money, and risks losing a potentially great lawyer (or several), but it also hurts productivity INSIDE the firm, because it calls into question its commitment to lawyers who are already INSIDE the firm. Goofy, but true.



6. Talk to the Hand: This one is pretty easy. Candidates are usually represented by a recruiter. Talk to the recruiter. Work through the recruiter. S/he has usually been to this rodeo before, and will know what to expect. S/he can do the hand-holding required, and help expedite whatever you need. Also, the recruiter will want information DIRECTLY from you anyway, so you might as well give it to them. More importantly, if this is the CANDIDATE's first time at the rodeo, they'll want to guide them through the process themselves. And finally, THEY know the candidate a LOT better than you do. . .and the candidate knows THEM a lot better than you do.

Joe's seen law firms lose really good candidates by rather clumsily trying to go around the recruiter, for no good reason, and to no good effect. Joe knows why firms want to do it. . .they reasonably believe that "direct is best." It's not to be sneaky, or avoid paying, or anything like that (we're getting paid, anyway, once we submit the candidate). But, from the candidate's perspective, they often feel like they're being abandoned, or pulled away from someone they know, and they freak.

Seriously, take Joe's advice. . .stay a good two steps away, and let the recruiter manage the candidate, until the offer has been accepted, and the appointment for orientation is set.



7. Mirrors Don't give Insight, they give Short Sight: To be blunt, internal reviews, while sometimes fun, and always interesting, are really REALLY bad at uncovering what's truly wrong with your firm, because law firms, more than almost any other organizational type, LOVE to kill the messenger. In fact, they DELIGHT in it. It's their almost favourite thing. If they could kill the same messenger, again and again, as many times as they wanted to, in the same day, and have that person resurrected, only to be killed again, without limit, Joe suspects very little lawyering would get done. . .that's how much law firms like to kill their own messengers.

Because of this virtual bloodlust, law firms and the people that populate them are notoriously bad at looking at themselves critically, and honestly, and truly identifying what the hell is wrong with them. There are many things. Poor management practices. Egos run amok. Outdated compensation plans. Goofy bonus pyramids. Dumb scheduling programs. Antiquated time and attendance policies. That's the good stuff. The funny thing is, almost ALL lawyers, and law firms, WANT to be places where people WANT to come to work.

Joe has only met a FEW lawyers that didn't really like other people, and didn't honestly believe that the practice of law was an honorable profession, populated by honorable people, who aim, every day, to do right by the people with whom they work. So what happened? Nobody knows. But it's time to look up from the case books and sniff the air, and upgrade those practices. . .and look outside for the answers. Because everbody knows. . .they aren't inside the firms. . .at least, not yet.



8. Culture? We don't need no stinking Culture!: This is Joe's favorite. Every time Joe sees some MP or CEO or whatnot blathering on about his/her firm's culture, Joe heads for the nearest bathroom. Joe has a delicate stomach. Culture, like "thinking out of the box" and "empowerment" is one of those terms that everybody is in love with, and doesn't have the least idea about. People seem to think that culture is fixed, immutable, unchanging, and up to their control, when, in reality, it is NONE of those things.

A firm's culture is created, negotiated, and informed by the organization's members, and, as such, is constantly being re-created, re-negotiated, and changed, both as people come and go, and as the stories, myths, legends, triumphs, and meanings change. THAT is why it's hard to get a fix on it. THAT is why people say "Well, ol' Bob just didn't understand our culture around here," and Bob says "That place was a freakin' Zoo, and no Zookeeper!"

It's also why mergers are so damn hard to accomplish. People become acculturated by ONE organization, join with ANOTHER organization, but combine into a THIRD organization, and the organizational leaders think that it'll just work itself out "somehow." Yeah, good luck with that. On the other hand, mis-matched organizational cultures are NOT reason enough NOT to undertake a merger. . .the cultures of both firms are going to change anyway, so it doesn't really matter if there's not a match today. . .unless Organization A is so powerful that it can subsume Organization B's culture, or vice versa, the culturality of either and/or both is irrelevant.

Given the blather above, and the factual realities, Joe would like to see an immediate suspension of all this chatter about culture until people start learning what the hell culture actually is. Read a book. Take a class. Get on the internet. Do something. But let's not throw that word around like it means something until we actually start to know HOW to use it. You know. . .think outside the box, and empower yourselves to learn a little bit about culture, is all Joe's sayin'.



Time to go. Y'all won't ever believe this, but it's Junior Partner calling. Special Ring. O Happy Day! Joe needs to work on giving love to Junior Partner. In the meantime. . . .



Love Your Recruiter!!


JoeRecruiter

Don't Bare your Bodkin or That Mirkin is Workin'!

Well, sports fans, it has been SOME of those weeks, let Joe tell something to you. This entry will have a whole mess o' little tests in it, and you can bet your Golden Banana on that. But let me tell you why. . .(for the record, just in case your Twonky isn't fully operational, there have been Six, so far. . .let's go over them. . .The first, Shakespeare, duh. Second, the Mirkin. Third, the Ramon Reference. Fourth, the Banana. Fifth, let me tell you why. And sixth, the Twonky.) Now, had Joe Vastened you fully on the Twonky reference, it would have been a twofer, and, of course, if Joe had said "some of these DAYS," instead of some of those weeks, that would have made the total EIGHT.

Why all the tests? Well, apparently, things are not advancing well enough with Junior Partner. Oh, trust Joe, in the illicit and sleazy department, things are going EXACTLY as well as they should be (and, for the record, let us just say that a Certain Restaurant and Lounge Combo and That Towers Over La Ciudad Sinho has taken more of Joebo's money than anybody else for FAR too long, and Joe will be fixing THAT crap up in a VERY short time!).


So, Jinkies!, it looks like it's time to find a fill-in (actually SEVERAL fill-ins. . .Junior Partner is NO punk when it comes to, uh, 'generating work' if you catch Joe's meaning), thus the test.

Given Joe's winning smile, strikingly cute face, rock-hard butt, and shy, almost. . .retiring personality, SOMETHING had to be done to, you know, have SOME kind of qualifying SOMETHING. . .there just aren't enough hours in the day otherwise. . .and Joe has to get a little work out SOMETIMES.

Speaking of which, what is going ON with you people? Especially you Associates? Especially you SENIOR Associates? Especially you Senior Associates who want to make Partner, and CLEARLY are not reading the Joester well enough (or, can Joe say this. . .frequently enough. By the way, Joe DOES take requests. . . .TIME FOR AN ASIDE. . .WALK WITH ME. . .)

ASIDE: In response to the, actually, surprisingly numerous inquiries, Joe wants to tell you that he would VERY MUCH like to blog more often, but doesn't usually have a lot to say, until something gets under his recruiting skin. Plus, even though it doesn't look like it, Joe actually has to work. . .like a DAWG, to afford the lifestyle to which he has SO become accustomed, but even more so. . .but don't tell anyone for pete's sake. Anyway, you can talk to Joe about anything, you know that, right? It's between just us monkeys. Joe's just saying. But, yeah, talk to Joe about stuff you want to know more about. What we really think. Junk like that there. If you ever tell anyone you caught Joe in a gentle moment, Joe WILL find you. I'm just saying. ASIDE ENDS HERE.

So, about these Associates. And the "NEW" news about Associate pay going sky-high. Of course, there's always a trade-off. Yeah, there is. Look, don't go crazy over the money at the BigLaws going up and down, and what the offset is. It's a game Associates, Firms, the LawPress, and the rest of us have been playing with one another for years.

Clients play it too: "Oh ma gawd, Board, them Loyers are stickin' it to us agin; whut we gon' dew Paw!?

Board: Tragedy, thy name is Lawyer! Ay, Crew-el world. Visit not 'pon this poor company again thy vicious treacheries! Ah, Fie! Blah, Blah. . .we have no choice, nay none at all, but to tell all the investors that we took a bath because of unusual and unexpected increases in operating expenses, but if you piss us off again, we won't protect you, we'll burn you like a witch at the stake in Old Salem, you got me!?

Client: Yuppers, I shore do! In the meantime, could we discuss my comp?

Board: Go thou, fiend. And, no frickin' way. You're lucky we even HAVE external counsel, ya putz!

And so it goes.

Meanwhile, recruiters call you dorks up, and you act like you're each, and individually, the only people on the planet who ever read Prosser's 2nd. . .but you're not smart enough to pretend you even LIKED it (some of us DID, by the way. . .ruh roh!). And we say "hey. . . you. . . (hint. . .7th clue). . .wanna work for a really dynamic law firm?" and we don't even bug you or ANYTHING, and you're all SNOTTY about it.

And when we ask for ACTUAL details, you get all defensive. Well guess what, Scooter? We do as much PRE-search as we can, but, not actually BEING psychic Joeself (many recruiters, it turns out, are also, NOT psychic), I NEED to know if my guess is as good as it is, or if you're only a REALLY GOOD lawyer, and not So Good Joe's Mother Would Throw Joe Under The Bus To Adopt You GOOD Lawyer.

Because here's the thing, Oh Great among the Greatest. Joe may be a punk, but he's as arrogant as YOU are, and he has YEARS on you, building a reputation for finding the BEST lawyers, not just the SECOND best, or the ALMOST best, or the. . . you get the idea.

But here's the OTHER thing. EVERY recruiter in the world wants the best candidate they can find. Just like every Lawyer wants the best client they can find. Yeah, there ARE some Lawyers that like to bottom feed, but that's not YOU, right? Well, it isn't Joe, either. And it isn't MOST other recruiters in the world. And it isn't virtually ANY Law Firm. EVERYBODY wants the best they can find.

Now it's also true that water finds its own level, and there is a limit as to how GOOD people are willing to pay for. . .there's a reason why some people buy cars with, say, "Cord" on the Marque, and some pay more for, ummmmm. . . .oh. . ."Jenz", let's say. There's also a reason why Joe drinks certain types of effervescent beverages as opposed to others, and Joe thinks we're all on the same page here.

Having said ALL of the above. . .if Joe has learned ANYTHING, either by himself, or by listening, VERY carefully, to EVERYONE who EVER said ANYTHING about recruiting, or hiring lawyers, or anything else. . . Joe has learned THIS, for SURE (Joe has a BIG FRICKIN' MOUTH, but Joe always, Always, ALWAYS listens to people who have experience that he does not, especially when THEY are doing what he is NOT YET ABLE to do. . .Joe listens to EVERYTHING. You can ALWAYS discard that which is worthless, but if you never hear it, you'll never even know):

You may have the perfect job, today. You may have the PERFECT life, today. You may BE perfect. Today. But life can change COMPLETELY, tomorrow. So always, Always, ALWAYS listen when someone offers you another option. You can always say no. But ALWAYS listen. Because, unless you have the power to CHANGE the future, you really can't KNOW it.

And that is the end of our sermon. If you'll please return your hymnals to the holder in front of you, you may consider yourself excused. Joe is DONE preaching for today. Joe is APPARENTLY full of some kind of Spirit.

In any event, be flattered when someone wants to talk to you for a job. It could be worse. . .they could want NOT to talk to you. Joe's just saying.



LOVE your Recruiter!!

JoeRecruiter

p.s. Now get out there and send people to the damn blog. . .spread far and wide the word! (hey, once Joe gets started preaching, he goes for it!)



CORRECTION:

It has been brung to Joe's attenzione that there were, in fact (as opposed to in point of fact. . .we'll be getting back to this in a moment, by the way), TEN potential references, not eight, as adduced in the foregoing. In Joe-glish, this means, I said they wuz eight insides, if you count all the potentials, but they is in fact ten. Because Joe foolishly forgot to count at the END of the rant, to, you know, CLOSE OUT the rant, which is HIGHLY irregular (hint: another one. The exact quote is: "This is HIGHLY irregular Commander!").

While we're at it, Joe would like someone to explain to him when you should say "in fact. . ..bluh bluh bluh. . ." and when you should say "in point of fact, bluh bluh bluh. . . ." Joe is JUST asking.

A QUESTION OF SIZE-Reposted by Permission.

You may be saying to your self "self, I thought we COVERED this already. . . .Joe, what is this all about? And Joe would say "Too, true, too true, but one of Joe's favourite (okay, not really favourite. . .okay, really sort of favourite, but not charmingest favourite) persons posted this post elsewhere, and sent it to Joe, and Joe dug it, so Joe asked to re-post, and here you are, and here is WHY.

The Question of materials, in general, comes up from time to time. Like, you know, ALL the time. "Hey, Joe," say the beagles, "hey, how long should my rezzy really BE, Joe? What should I put in there Joe? Which is better, Corned Beef or Pastrami?"

You know, really, well, FOUNDATIONAL questions. Joe often ponders these things (except the one about Corned Beef and Pastrami. . .that one. . .that one is a toughie. . .it will require many MANY more sandwiches to answer). And when someone ELSE has an insight, Joe is all over it, like an Associate on a Stripper offering half-price lap dances, (and so, for the record, is Joe).

Here then, a niblet about Resume length. Yeah, yeah, guys and length, guys and size. . .Joe likes that, the way it sounds. . .guys and size. Some of you, you need to answer one of those ads in the back of Men's Journal, or Men's Fitness, or GQ, or Esquire, or Something. . .I swear. Or date shorter women. . .or SOMEthing, jeez!

A QUESTION OF SIZE

Like most matters, and, frankly, QUESTIONS of size, I think this one has a LOT to do with how one was, or was not, blessed by nature.

Most people answer from their own perspective, and, sadly, most of our perspectives are informed, not by logic, not by pragmatism, but my myth, fantasy, history, fear, misinformation, and, sometimes, our magical lucky charms. . .who the hell knows?

The answer, as in so many other things in life is. . .your resume should be PRECISELY as long as it NEEDS to be to tell me everything I need to know about YOU, in order to know whether or not YOU are the man or woman of my dreams, job-wise. PERIOD. That's it, that's all.

I agree that the most important information should be first, but as to whether it should be the first third of the first page, or the first three lines of the top half above optical center in 10 pt. Optima, or whatever, I don't know, and I have better things to do than spend much time navel-gazing over those details.

Here's the answer: If you want to capture my attention, then CAPTURE MY ATTENTION. If you want me to listen to your story, then TELL ME A STORY THAT WILL GRAB ME. You KNOW how to do it. . .you learned when you were less than two years old. . .EVERYBODY DOES!

Why we have to have such a shrying gevalt over this hoo-hah, ALL THE TIME, frankly, is beyond me.

And, as a recruiter myself, I can tell you what I AM looking for. . .I'm looking for diamonds. But I don't have time to mine them, rough them, cut them, polish them, grade them, mount them, and THEN select them. . .really I don't. I want to be able to throw the lot of them on a big ole table (covered in black velvet, naturally. . .hey, this is MY fantasy). . .walk around, and find the one that sparkles the brightest, and say "THAT one. . .THAT's the one I want!"

So, if YOU want to capture MY attention (and I have a shorter attention span than the average two-year old. . .frankly, when compared with the average two-year-old, I don't come out so good in MANY respects), then you really need to sparkle, and you'd better do it quick.

Because, as captivating as a diamond IS, and they always ARE. . .let's face it, given the choice between a diamond and, say, Silly Putty(tm), the average two-year old will ditch the sparkly in less than no time, and so will I.

EDITORIAL NOTE: For the first time, possibly ever, Joe has nothing to add.

LOVE YOUR RECRUITER!!



JoeRecruiter

The Changes, They Are All Timin'. Bill This!

So, there Joe was, suckin' down some luscious liquid protein (not as luscious as some of y'all might be thinking, but Joe appreciates the thought nevertheless), and catching up on the events of the day, legally speaking, when, like a "thwack" from a well-aimed belt, something hit him, right on his rock-hard butt-cheek (nummy cake, in the latest parlance, for those of you trying to keep up).

Joe kids. No, this one hit him right square between his perfectly formed eyebrows (which saves a total FORTUNE on waxing, let Joe tell YOU!).

Between Joe and you, and Joe wouldn't share this with just anybody, it seems that Managing Partners are all aflutter about the fallout from the trend toward going public. Okay, maybe not all aflutter. Twitterpated? Aghast? Stultified? Hey, Joe is WORKING here.

Okay, let Joe break it down for ya fellas (disclaimer: In this context, "fellas" means "y'all" but it wouldn't be nearly as lyrical to say "break it down for me ladies and gentlemen" as it is to say "break it down for me fellas," get it? Stupid PC, anyway. . . .you DO know that PC originally meant that which it was okay to say in Stalin's Cabinet without getting your head blown off, right? Joe's just saying.)

Ahhhhhhh, the wonders of the Benzodiazepines, those workhorses of the centrally-acting neuroleptic agents (Joe just made that up. Joe wouldn't know a neuroleptic agent if it walked up and bit him on the snout, but it SOUNDS good, don't it? What, by the way, IS a neuroleptic agent?).

Anyway, put aside the fact that most Managing Partners couldn't manage their way through a bowl of Oatmeal, and, like Military Intelligence, the title is, usually, Oxymoronic at best. What gets Joe right in the shorties is the fact that, apparently, a group of the self-anointed (we'll talk later about anointing yourself, during the "adult" section of the discussion) have decided that this is a "BAD" thing. "What about The Law," they decry! "What about The Clients!" they wail! Some brave souls say "Uh, what about my frickin' retirement, huh? What about that there?" Finally, an MP with, uh, "sisu" (ask a Japanese friend about sisu). You so rarely see it these days.

It's as refreshing to Joe as a cold Sciroccan wind wailing across the Schwartzwald, with a vengeance (another totally inside reference, but if you guess it, Joe will be well pleased). The truth is, these changes will force MPs to be more responsive to the needs of clients, and to the other, (dare Joe say it? Yes!), Stakeholders in the organisation, like real live Partners (those who work for a living), and Associates, and whatnot.

Now, don't misunderstand. Joe feels like this is a nexus. That y'all is about to fall up into. Joe doesn't know what a nexus is. But he wouldn't want to step in one. The dictionary says it's the "means of connection," but also that it's a link or a tie. But it's also the past participle of the Latin nectere which, as we all remember from Mrs. DeGroot's Latin Class and Psycho BootCamp, means "to bind." God bless Mrs. DeGroot. Without her, we never would have known what TRUE Psychological Warfare was, and so would NOT have been prepared for, you know, dating, law school, our first time, the O-face, you know what I'm saying.

So, about this nexus. Here's the link, for all you past participial debaters: Firm MPs, not so much. Office MPs, for the most part, two thumbs up. But they're usually given an almost impossible task. They're supposed to run the office, and STILL do lawyering. Are you on Crack? No really. Are you? It's hard enough to lawyer at any time. But you want me to run this monkey house AND put in Killable, I mean Billable hours at the same damn rate as the monkeys?

Look, Erik, I know we've talked about this before, but, seriously, before your brain shrinks ANY more than it has already, you have GOT to try to inhale WITHOUT hitting the pipe, at least OCCASIONALLY. And while we're on the subject, Dude, really, STOP talking about "Vitamin-E" like anybody believes it's anything other than what it is. . .when you moved the water dispenser INTO your office. . . .please.

But that's what most Firm MPs want. While we're on the subject, could we change the term? I mean, Joe doesn't know about you, but given the supressed giggles and, frankly, outright guffaws Joe hears whenever almost EVERY "Firm MP" in the industry is referred to by that title (especially by the receptionists. . .Joe's just saying. . .a word to the wise. . .), Joe suggests another, um, "styling" or perhaps the better term would be, Joe doesn't know, what, honorary? Joe's just saying that prefacing MP with, um, Firm, isn't helping anybody. . .certainly not a lot of you who quite frankly need all the help you can get, regardless of the colour (as in blue, yellow, whatever).

But here's the thing that's really up Joe's nose (ah ha! I KNEW some of you would perk up right then. Joe should have said this HOURS ago!) What is WITH you punks and your fear of Straight Billing, by which Joe means, getting off the Hourly Billing Carousel? Joe does NOT get it. It's easy. Just stop. In Honour of Miz Nancy Reagan, Just Say No. Don't Do It.

Abandon The Hourly Billing Model. It's stupid. It sucks. It's mythic. It's phony. It doesn't even frickin' work. And no true professional does it anyway. Think about it. Does your Surgeon bill by the hour? Oh, HELL no. If you asked her to, would she? Oh HELL no. If you said "Do it, or else I'm getting another Surgeon!" what would she do? She'd say "I understand completely. Please let me know where to send your records," and she'd turn on her very stylish heel and disappear back into her office, and call you a stupid, well, it rhymes with duck.

Does your Dentist charge by the hour? Not on your by the hour, six-minute incremented life. When you call his assistant Fred, you find out that it's going to cost $27,000 to restore that smile you let go to hell back to even the most BASIC level of decency, and as you write that check to deplete your bank account, you say to yourself, "Well, that represents X number of hours of extra work for me, dammit!"

But not your Dentist. He says "Well, that's one case. A toughie, yes indeedy. Thank God these Beagles spend their lives in six-minute increments, and won't spend six minutes a day brushing, flossing, and irrigating their nasty mouths. Paradise Island, here I come."

Now, Joe, you might be saying, there are LOTS of professions that charge by the hour. And, Joe would have to agree that there are. Plumbers. Electricians. HVAC people. People who can charge triple time when you call them at 2 a.m. on Sunday morning because your house blew all the circuits and you're standing there with NO power, and in three hours, you have to jump YOUR skanky butt in the shower, in order to catch a red-eye to Boston, where you ABSOLUTELY CAN NOT charge triple-time to a client who's dragging you in to do a dog-and-pony show for a client who cares not a bit about the fact that your kid is in the play on Monday afternoon at 3:30, his first ever, and YOU won't be there, because YOU are stuck in an hourly billing cycle, and all that matters is frickin' face time, because if your skanky butt isn't there in front of the client, you can't BILL the client.

Because YOU don't bill for value, YOU bill for, I don't know, RESEARCH, or Court Time, or Dog-and-Pony shows, or something. YOU don't bill for results. . .you only get to bill the client when you're DOING something.

Your Surgeon, on the other hand, is billing for her knowledge, skill, and ability. That operation may only take her 2, 3, 4 hours. MAYBE, if there are complications, it might take more. But, that's okay with you. In fact, you're VERY hopeful she's in and out. You would, IN FACT, prefer that she be in and out. You'd LOVE the hell out of that. Her fee is $15,000.00, no matter how long it takes. She said so. Fine, you said.

And, if she comes back and tells you, "Hey, Mikey, the surgery went SO smoothly. . .we were in and out in about 75 minutes. . .your recovery was lightning fast. . .you're like a GENIUS patient. From induction to clearance out of Recovery, I think you were, I don't know, maybe four hours tops. You're the shortest case ever!" you'll probably kiss her, if you're not too groggy.

Not YOU boy. The hourly billing model PUNISHES you for being a genius lawyer. It's completely f'ed up. And, if you're really REALLY good, you get punished even more. What if you're not only a genius effing lawyer, but a LUCKY genius lawyer. You're freakin' broke!

And, if you're a lucky genius lawyer that juries, or judges, or BOTH, love Love LOVE, you don't even have enough money for the bus, and you probably live with your mom. Trust Joe. Joe knows.

So. Change the freakin model. Charge for value. If your client doesn't like it, find another client. Explain it to them. If you're any good. If you are, then it doesn't have to be a problem. If you're not, then the hourly billing model was MADE for you.

Joe thinks it was lame-ass lawyers who came UP with the hourly model in the first place. And the corporate boneheads (pushed by equally lame-ass accountants, who ALSO sucked, for the same damn reasons; genius accountants are GOOD and FAST; Joe's accountant is so good, Joe would . . .well, Joe can't say, but the guy is a freakin' Rock Star!) went for it hard and fast. Joe appreciates the hard and fast, but, seriously.

Charge for value. Charge for what you CAN do. Don't be a wuss. If your clients aren't with it, GET NEW CLIENTS. By the way, can ANYBODY tell Joe when lawyers started becoming cowards? There WAS a time when Lawyers freakin' ROCKED! Joe dug that. Joe misses that.

Love Your Recruiter! The dirty way.


JoeRecruiter.

Mea Culpa, With HomeStyle Crust, & a new beginning.

Joe is Ashamed. . .so So SO Ashamed. Even Joe's shame. . . is Ashamed. Joe has been away far, far too long. If Joe could, Joe would tell you all about it, but then I'd have to kill you, and I only have fifteen rounds (actually, Joe's never seen an actual weapon in real-live life, but that sounds bloody correct. . .judges?).

Let me just say, for those of you who are DYING to know, that it's been a bloody adventure, and as soon as the pictures come back from Super-Duper-Mart, I SWEAR, we'll all look at them together, kay?

And, for those of you who notice these things, I'm flipping in and out of third-person indiscriminately, for no other reason than because I feel like it, so there. There are some housekeeping details Joe MUST deal with.

Blogger/blogspot/blog-r-us, whatever, being administered/tortured/you-get-the-idea by the kind of people who come up with these ideas, and being what it is, Joe has decided NOT to publish comments, as much as he would like to, only because they're all gushy and glowy, but, if the commentators would like to resubmit their comments in the form of a question (and where has Joe heard that before, he pondered), with email addresses, Joe WOULD be happy to answer said questions; for some unknowable reason, there was no way to know the delightful and charming correspondents' questions, concerns, death threats, etc.

As some of you will recall, Joe has, from time to time, made it a practice to visit Jr. Partner in the totally extreme West, in that Dungeon of Depravity known as Las Vegas, the Citadel of Sin, or, as Joe likes to call it, El Ciudad Sinho (BTW, y'all, Joe KNOWS. . . . .never mind, it's a private joke anyway). As many of you ALSO know, one of Joe's almost favourite recruiters lives there as well, and works for a very good firm based there. I should say, uh, "worked."

Joe is obligated to report that a couple of weeks ago this very VERY good recruiter, whom (who?) many beagles in the profession know, suddenly separated from the firm for whom he had worked for some time. That's not unusual, of course. People come, and they go. What Joe found unusual, and a little puzzling, was the reason for the departure. On the other hand, Joe finds Childproof lids puzzling, so what does Joe know? Of course, neither the firm NOR this very well-respected recruiter has said anything to Joe.

However, the word on the street is that this particular recruiter is no longer with the firm specifically because the firm became aware of the recruiter's particular diversity status. Without being too specific, Joe understands that the firm became aware of a specific orientation involving this recruiter. Given that this particular recruiter is extremely well-known for having specific expertise in diversity recruiting, and given that the firm was trying to build its reputation for expertise in this specific area of recruiting, Joe found the whole thing a bit bizarre.

The good news is that the recruiter is supposedly going Solo, and, while Joe HATES competition of any kind, let's be honest, nobody is REALLY any competition to Joe anyway, so, from Joe to Mr. Las Vegas, best wishes, and I hope you and the Mister will be very happy together (ah, young love is so. . .so. . .please excuse Joe. . .I need an absorbent tissue).

And why did Joe waste YOUR valuable time, and HIS valuable screen real estate to tell you this story? Because, it's important to help young whipper-snappers just starting out. And this young family, what with the baby coming and all. . .besides, this boy KNOWS Jr. Partner, and Joe knows Jr. Partner, and log-rolling is a time-honored tradition, and, at some future time, Joe might want HIS log, uh, rolled, if you take his meaning. . .just keep your eyes out, for pity's sake, and support the profession is all Joe's saying. Young love. All that. Besides, he's getting married for Heaven's sake. Joe thinks. No announcement yet. Wonder if they'll both wear tuxes. Who throws the bouquet? Anyway.

Sorry, Joe wandered off the topic for a minute. Okay, maybe FRACTIONALLY more than a minute.

So, with absoLUTEly no intended reference to the above (and I totally mean this!), "WHAT", you may ask, "is up your butt, Joe?", and I would say, "Y'all, I am getting damn sick and tired of Recruitment Directors and Other Than MPs/MDs being in charge of Attorney Hiring, that is what is up my butt, and it's beginning to chafe, or whatever stuff does when it is up Joe's butt," although Joe must confess, he doesn't actually have any experience of this. Stuff up Joe's butt, he means.

Here's Joe's point. Recruiting managers are all fine, and so on, but they tend to be an inefficient layer of goo in between decision-makers and recruiters. Somebody has to be able to execute a decision. That's the first problem. There's more.

The next problem is this. Everybody and their dog is trying to find a way to increase retention. The answer's pretty easy. Stop letting Partners be dicks to Associates. Tell Partners that being a good lawyer is all well and good, but Associates are not their personal ass-boys and girls, and the two don't necessarily go together; it's not necessarily a spoils system. And stop thinking that you can jack starting pay every six months, make a big announcement, and then back-end it by raising hourly billing minimums. Seriously.

At some point, you're going to burn out even hard-core Associates; I mean, Joe knows Associates at some BigLaws that're pumping out 2300 hours. Why? Because, the MINIMUM is 2100 hours. But you know, and Joe knows, an associate CAN'T bill every hour they log, it's impossible. So they pump out as many hours as they can, and they pray to whatever (Insert Diety or non-Diety here) they believe/don't believe in that some of them will stick to whatever wall they throw them at. And if they're really lucky, they don't get stuck with a Partner, Team Leader, or MP like most of you out there, because most of you SUCK.

Okay, changing voice, pitch, manner and tone, so don't get lost. This is for those of you who think you know what "firm culture" is. You don't. Maybe Joe spoke too soon. Take this test. Do you know Deal and Kennedy? Pacanowski? Smircich? Malanowski? Schein? Weick? Do you understand the difference between an Interpretivist Perspective and a Structuralist Perspective? Yeah? Okay, MAYBE you understand "firm culture." If you don't know EVERY SINGLE ONE of the terms Joe listed above, you don't know sickum about culture, so don't ever use that word again, unless you have season tickets to the Opera in your city.

By the way, those names are just the teeniest, tiniest, itsiest, bitsiest, ittiest, bittiest piece of the smallest molecule of the smallest piece of what is involved in "culture," and, except insofar as the reference to Malanowski, we haven't even discussed the legend, story, and mythographic linkages, not to mention the narratological links, so don't for even a fraction of a millisecond think you have a handle on what constitutes "culture." And don't, please God, get Joe started on "Meaning."

Joe's point, now that you're about to lose that Non-Fat Half-Caff Lite-Iced Semi-Sweet Quad-Shot Double-Foam Caramel Macchiato (they hadn't the heart to tell you that "macchiato" technically means espresso "marked" with foam), is that there's a lot Law Firms could actually do if they CARED to, but they probably don't, which is actually frickin' stupid, because they waste an ASSload of time, money, and resources, and they also waste an assload of their clients' time, money, and resources, just on bringing new Associates (and new Partners, and new teams), up to speed on files, cases, issues, and whatnot, to educate them on stuff that was happening or is happening, when they COULD have saved all that money for bonuses, or rebates, or discounts, or, hell, Joe don't know, whatever, hookers, who cares?

But, NO, they'd rather act like a bunch of frickin' dorks and waste time, money, and effort, not to mention trips to Vegas, and quality hookers, and, you know, lap dances and booze for hell's sake, than wise their dumb asses up, and just reel these crazy Partners in for five minutes, and sit 'em down, and say:

"Look, ya frickin' dork, I know you get off on terrorizing Associates, but this crap has GOT to stop. No, lemme be clear. This crap WILL stop, and it WILL stop right frickin' now, or you are SO done, and no matter how good you think you are, you aren't THAT good, buddy boy (or missy, whatever; Joe digs missy), so take whatever pills you need to take; drink whatever protein supplement you need to drink; buy a tasty energy drink, or a frosty cola beverage; ingest a much beloved food; engage in a much needed workout; consult with your spiritual, financial, or other professional advisor; get a cherished animal companion; be one with nature; get your chakras aligned, or tuned up, or rotated, or have them removed, or what-the-f-EVER, but get your act together, and get it together right damn now, 'cause things are gonna be different, starting right this second, you get me?!"

And that, really, is that. It really is almost that easy. For law firms where it isn't quite that easy, then the exec committees need to meet and, crazy idea, execute a contract wherein one requirement of every single attorney is that they be required to adhere to a basic code of decency and professionalism toward one another.

Joe isn't saying they have to kiss up to one another. Joe wouldn't do that under pain of death. In fact, Joe would PREFER death to having to be nice to some coworkers, (which is why Joe has flown solo since 1879). Joe actually has a contract rider that SPECIFICALLY gives him the right to inflict tortious and painful verbal abuse upon coworkers, managerial persons, and those who specifically sign his checks and pay him. There is, in fact, specific language that permits Joe to "bite the hand that feeds him." Literally. But that's just Joe. Joe is bad.

There's more coming. But Joe has step away for a minute. A very juicy looking hand just passed by in the hallway, and Joe is feeling a bit peckish. But first, I gotta review some contract language.

Love your Recruiter!


JoeRecruiter
THE Legal Recruiter

So, how good IS good?

Well, it's been a while, hasn't it. Joe missed you. Joe was in the middle of a. . .dare Joe say it? YES! . . .a FIRESTORM of controversy involving a couple of elements.

First was the mini-merger (thank you fans!). Second was the evil witch associate trying to do the runaround on Joe (she'll never work in this town again, Wah Hah Hah!). Third was the suckbag Partner who, as it turns out, will never get placed by anyone ever, because he sucks. You don't want Joe to call you? You got it, pal. And neither will anyone else, neither! Pray that this job is the only one you ever want, and, or need, 'cause you are DONE.

It's all better now, but Joe's butt definitely shows scars, and not the cute kind, like when you have a li'l scar above your chin from where you wiped out on your bike when you were six. NO. These are claw-mark, hack-saw type scars, battle scars. Brutal. In fact, Joe feels manly when someone sees his butt scars. Junior Partner LOVES 'em. But that's a whole 'nother story for a whole 'nother day.

Back to the topic at hand: how good IS good? You may recall that we were about to address that question when we were rudely interrupted by news of Chicago passing a "No Foie Gras" ordinance. See the previous post.

Here's the thing about good. You can have any opinion of yourself that you want to have, but it doesn't really matter what YOU think. . .it matters what JOE thinks. Because Joe (and other, less stylish, less, you know, Top Drawer, as it were) recruiters, are the opinion-makers when it comes to making someone hireable, no matter how good you are in court, and no matter how many "Litigator of the Millenium" awards you have.

Some of the best Lawyers in the Country are flat jerks, and couldn't get another job if they were the last (Fill In Here) Lawyer in the world.

While we're at it, when a recruiter calls to ask if you're interested in perhaps looking at another opportunity, it doesn't mean we're criticising your current place of employment.

It's also not the time to get defensive with me about your current crib. . .I don't CARE about the long and storied history of your firm, or about how the founder of the firm started as the third sweeper-upper, toiling late into the night back in the days of yore in Eighteen Hundred and Long Ago.

I'm just ASKING if you're amenable to finding OUT about a job that seems to fit YOUR skills, background, and knowledge, experience, and, perhaps, temperament (AKA KSA). If you are, GREAT. If not, please just say so.

And please don't lecture me on the "culture of the firm." You don't know ANYTHING about the culture of a firm you're not a part of. . .you probably don't even know anything about the culture of the firm you ARE a part of. How do I know? Decades of experience with firm cultures that are nothing at all like they're described by the people living in them, and even less like the people NOT living in them. If law firms, and/or the people in them, knew their own cultures, there would never be an unhappy lawyer anywhere, ever, and we all KNOW that's not the case. So please, dispense with the lecturing about "firm culture." Find another term you don't understand to drivel on about, please.

In the end, you are as good as Joe's ability to sell you as good is. In the meantime, a great reputation as a (fill in here) lawyer may be swell, but it doesn't necessarily get you hired. And holding yourself out as some kind of untouchable because you think you're some kind of wunderkind will probably cost you in the long run. Because, even though Joe won't say anything, eventually your attitude will get around the community (not everybody keeps their mouth shut like Joe does), and, Genius Lawyer or not, nobody likes a jerk, even a gifted jerk.

Time to go. . .Joe has to find a really good gift for Junior Partner. . .and make reservations for our fave restaurant in New York City. . .sometimes, being a jerk has its costs.

Love Your Recruiter!

JoeRecruiter.

How Good IS Good when you're very VERY good?

Hubb-eye frubb-ends. That was a test. If you know what Joe was saying, Joe suspects you were a dork when you were a kid. Probably still are, but that's okay too. Before we get to the MEAT of the moment, Joe wants to give a shout out to the actually dumbest city in the Universe. . .that'd be Chicago.

In one of the stupidest decisions in the history of civilization, the good people of one of the formerly greatest cities in the world (that's A.Ds.--Ante Decisio), have decided to let people who are FAR less informed about food than Joe is about, well, practically anything, tell them that, as of 22 August, 2006, a day that will ALSO live in infamy, they can no longer order Foie Gras. Nope. No more. After that date, if you want a fatty duck, duck, goose liver, you have to go somewhere else, other than Greater Chicago to get it. Are you people out of your minds?

Never mind whether or not you LIKE Foie Gras or whether you would allow even the smallest molecule past your lips and into your mouths, (despite what Joe happens to personally know that a great many of you have admitted into your pie holes), that's not even the point. The point, and Joe DOES have one, is how could the people of such a formerly great city allow anybody to tell them what they could eat, nay, what they could order, nay again. . .what they could even OFFER one another as a CHOICE!

What has happened to the proud people of Chicago. . .the people who gave us, some would say even DEFINED the word Chic? Have the forty-leven million of you simply taken leave of your senses? And what of you, in particular, in the legal community? Never has Joe been prouder than when one of the tough and talented of the Legal Elite in Chi- went to battle with the baddies. And now to find out that it was all for naught?! Joe's heart is BREAKING!

Joe would have expected this from those chowderheads in Boston, the nutballs in New York City, even the Bleachy-Beachies in L.A., who, like monkeys, are fun, but moody, but Joe would have bet his very last dollar that the good people of Chicago would NEVER bend over and take it up the wazz on an issue as important to the Mid-Western soul as dinner.

This is particularly profound, and meaningful, because Joe just came back from a visit to Junior Partner in the City of a Thousand Sins, wherein much merriment was made, and more than one Foie Gras made its way to our table during the Little Weekend that Could. Joe has become a big BIG fan of waterfowl and their livers, and, while not particularly proud of what is done to the little wretches in order to make them ready for his dinner, Joe thinks that, in comparison, Chickens and Cows and Piggies have it MUCH worse than Gooses and Duckies.

But that's another post for another day. Chicago, Joe is dismayed, and must respond to this outrage in the only way possible. After this post posts, Joe will board a plane for what it possibly his last trip to Chicago, make reservations at any of many fine eating establishments, (except Charlie Trotters. . .that wuss took Foie Gras off the menu light years ago, but Joe notes that he still has Chicken, Beef, and Pork on this menus. . ..what a hypocrite. . .or maybe he's just a moron who doesn't know how these animals are treated), and order Foie Gras in as many forms as possible over the weekend, eating himself into a frenzy until fully and completely surfeited. You should come too!

You know what. . .Joe is too sick at heart to really talk about what was bugging him. Just do this. . .make sure you don't screw yourself out of a good chance to get the job of your dreams by always supporting the use of external recruiters, no matter where you work. Ex Rocks! (Externals, we mean)

Love Your Recruiter!!

JoeRecruiter

Size Matters. . . Sorry Guys (some of you, anyway)!

Well, it's that time again. . .as Spring sprang (springed? Sprung? Sproinged? Whatever) fullspeed into Summer, a young beagle's fancy turned to billings, and damned if a young Joe's fancy didn't fancy a fancy new car. . .or a truck. Dogs (and Joes) love trucks.

Needless to say, a new truck requires even more relentless poundings of the pavement, even more deceptive skullduggery, more Shanghai-ing than General Tso (and possibly just as much chicken. . .Joe's just saying).

Fortunately for Joe, the summer heat makes even the most benign, happy, contented cow of a partner ever so much more LESS so, and by now, the dog days of summer are biting beagles of every type and description right in the ass. And there are LOTS of openings, all over Joe's territory, stretching as it does from sea to shining sea, with lots of dreck in between. O happy day!

But it's not all beer, skittles, and occasional lettuce wraps here in the land of vixens, oh my no. Clients want partners with, um, how can I say this. . ."Beega Booksa." Joe gets it. What Joe doesn't get is why an attorney would call about an opening and then act like the size of their book (and its ulimate portability) doesn't matter. It's pretty obvious why most beagles are men. . .they still foolishly think size doesn't matter, when it should be clear to absolutely everyone that size really DOES matter.

Bigger IS better, and a helluva lot more fun. . .ask anyone. Thank (insert favoured deity or NON-deity here)!, Joe often says to himself, I've always had a big, uh, "book of business." Joe can't imagine what it would be like to walk around having to service someone ELSE's client's, but you'd be amazed at the sheer number of partners who think a law firm would like nothing more than having them help them eat someone else's kill.

Don't misunderstand, Joe doesn't believe in strict "eat what you kill" comp plans, or firms built on that philosophy, but it's completely appropriate to ask a partner what s/he's planning to bring to the party when they call to inquire about a job. And, as Joe said before, there are LOTS of jobs. But, please, Joe is BEGGING, when you call to ask about a job, put OUT a little bit first. . .offer your comp, your billing, your rate, and your portables, BEFORE you ask who the client is. . .who says YOU are the be-all and end-all of desirability? And if you are, then you should be able to prove it by telling Joe about your comp. Right out of the gate.

Got a big one? Prove it! Book of business, Joe means.

Love your Recruiter!!



--JoeRecruiter

What do Clients Want? What Joe Wants. Duh!

Joe hears it all the time? Hey, Joe. . .you got gum?. . .I mean, hey Joe, what do clients want? Clients want what Joe wants, and Joe wants what Clients want. We've been over this before. But, as usual, you were doing so SO well, and then things went to hell in a Laundry Basket.

Whether a partner or an associate, if you're going to bother to call, be prepared to tell me what you earn, your hourly rate, your portable book value, and what you billed last year, and your average for the last five years. Within the first three or so minutes. Before I tell you the name of the client. Don't argue with me about it, because I'm not going to tell you. Even if I wanted to, I can't. And don't think you're hurting me or my chances by not disclosing, either. You wouldn't have called if you weren't interested, and if YOU called, what makes you think others haven't?

The truth is, about 12% (remember that figure from our earlier lesson?) of ALL attorneys move around on an annual basis, so they're calling, and a LOT of them are calling Joe, so if you're an uppity type lawyer, don't even bother to call me. I'd just as soon you stay with your current firm and make THEM miserable.

Joe would prefer to work with smart, happy lawyers who know their capabilities, and their abilities, and know they're dealing with a professional who isn't going to blab their information all around town. If you're so insecure you can't tell me what I need to know, just don't bother to call me. By the way, Joe probably makes more than you do, so don't think you're likely to shock me (hint: Joe's BASE is higher than the highest salary paid to the highest associate level of the highest paying BigLaw firm in the country, plus, Joe gets a very generous commission, AND bonuses). Hey, water finds its own level.

And, yes, Joe is a snob. He prefers to work with the best attorneys and law firms in the country. So far, so good. You don't wanna play in our sandbox, that's fine too. Stay second class. . .the world needs you too. . .just don't call a boy, and we won't bother you neither.

What brought on this fit of pique? Oh, some ditz of a lawyer told me that s/he was "not at the applicant level anymore. . .I've been practicing law too long to be treated like a newbie, if you understand my meaning." Sure, Joe understands. But Joe deals with MPs and heads of Litigation and Corporate Law, and other departments all day long, and really only answers to those people and Exec Committees, and that level of person, but I STILL come down to the lower levels and mingle with associates and partners and lower mortals because that's what pays the rent, and I very politely ask y'all if you'd like to check out another opportunity, so, your highness, if I may be so bold, I don't think it's completely out of line to expect you to answer MY bloody questions, because, until you're OFFERED the bloody job, you ARE a bloody applicant, no matter WHAT you call yourself, or how HIGH your opinion of yourself (even rainmakers receive paychecks, your majesty. . .).

So when a boy calls and leaves a message, return it, be polite, answer the freakin' questions, and don't be so uppity. Because there may come a time when you need a recruiter/headhunter/ghoul/whatever you call us these days, and, at least in Joe's case, we have VERY long memories, and VERY short tempers.

LOVE your Recruiter!!

JoeRecruiter

The Perils of Partner Management

Joe has missed you Awful! Where to begin? So MUCH to tell you!! Joe has been ON ASSIGNMENT. Can you say "On Assignment!? Joe knows. And YES, Joe can say "Bite Me" just like YOU did. Good for YOU!

It's a partner assigment and it's suckin' all of Joe's time. Joe can't even close the deal with Junior Partner more than once, twice a week. On the other hand, Joe recently met McLittle Babe-a-Licious. McLittle Babe-A-Licious is, as you would expect, not all that tall. Pretty Pretty Blue Eyes. Pretty Pretty Pieces Parts. Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiice Chassis. Can't Kiss worth a damn if Joe's observatement the other night at "Ho Bar" are to be believed. Let Joe explain "Observatement."

In another time, and another place, Joe was SERIOUSLY after a Luscious Latin, and could NOT close the deal. Upon enquiry, Joe was told, in all seriousness, that before LusciousLatin would consent to Merge and Acquire, LL would have to "observate" Joe for a while. And there you are. Joe feels that more observatement is in order for McLittle, but Babe-A-Licious or NOT, McL needs to learn how to kiss without swallowing a Joe's face. Joe has a cute face, in a puppyish way, and if it were swallowed, coffee could not be ordered at Starbucks. What would Joe do? Joe fears to ask this question!

You're probably saying to yourself "Self, what in the world has this to do with legalness and thingies?" and the answer is not a bloody thing. Joe is simply sharing in order to bond with you. Do you feel bondy? If so, Joe's work here is done.

Back to the Partner thang. Joe has been busier than a cut rate hooker on the day after Thanksgiving. Everybody wants partners. Guess what Joe found out. Partners rule. Associates are right pains in the butt.

Partners are a dream. They aren't coy about the money they make. They don't play games about their jobs, their dreams, their ambitions, what they bill, PRECISELY what they make, and how they make it, or anything else. If they're interested, they say so, and they say why. If not, they still listen, and they ALWAYS return calls if their area of practice is even REMOTELY related to the area for which you're recruiting. Who knew? Joe really didn't. Joe has worked with GROUPS and a couple partners before, but not large numbers of partners before, and he always assumed that the partners he worked with before were just easy to work with because he knew them from before.

Nope! Virtually every partner has been a dream in comparison to associates, just in terms of calling to talk about opportunities. Accordingly, Joe has formulated the following Rules that Partners DO Follow, which is why They Are A Partner and YOU ARE NOT:

1. Partners Return the Recruiter's Call, because they're smart enough to know they don't know everything.

2. Partner Answer the Questions they're asked. If they have concerns about confidentiality, they ask ONE question to confirm it, make their decision, and stick with it.

3. Partners are not coy. They don't play word games because they don't have time.

4. Partners send the materials they say they'll send.

5. If a partner is interested they'll send materials, if they're not, they say so, and don't waste the recruiter's time.

6. Very often, if a partner finds out that the position is not right, they'll either refer YOU to a contact, or, more often, tell someone to call YOU.

7. Partners very often ask if you know of other positions for people that they know. They're plugged in, and they know how to use their network.

8. Partners treat Recruiters like key members of their career management team, and keep them involved, informed, and updated.

Joe is seriously considering dropping all associate recruiting given this recent experience. Failing that, Joe strongly recommends that Associates who are serious about finding newer, better jobs, start adopting the above principles, and integrating them into their professional business approach.


As always, Joe appreciates his readers and asks you to spread the word about the blog to everyone you know. Joe already knows that the Partners are doing so. They send him Eamails to let him know they've spread the word. Joe is BIG on partners.

LOVE Your Recruiter!!

JoeRecruiter-THE Legal Recruiter

Absence AND Malice

Howdy, Y'all. JoeRecruiter is on a short sabbatticcall (yes, JoeRecruiter knows it's spelled wrong. . .that's sort of part of the joke), because of a MAJOR project. Also, Joe closed the deal with Junior Partner. Righton. Please don't neglect reading the site. joe loves you.

Love Your Recruiter!

JoeRecruiter

Reflections on a Can of Liquid Cocaine Substitute

Okay, it isn't really liquid cocaine substitute, and, to be honest, JoeRecruiter wouldn't know cocaine, or a substitute, if it walked up and bit him on the ass, although it might be fun to try. . .JoeRecruiter missed the "rah rah" druggie days of the 80s, and given his problems with even a double Mocha Latte ("he do the Shimmy Shimmy Shake. . .Yeah!), doubts that his system could tolerate even a gram of the stuff. An ounce? A kilo? Who knows? However, JoeRecruiter apparently has no problem swilling down, well, let's just call it "Blue Cow" energy drink, three at a time. Of course, after such an event, Joe could separate butter from whole milk (or make a FANTASTIC martini), but it has been a FATIGUING couple of weeks, and OH, has Joe missed YOU!

First of all, the Bi-Coastal, unilateral, search and destroy, meet and greet, ass-kissing, baby-shaking, hand-wiping LOVE fest between JoeRecruiter and the Law Firms. The ONLY thing that made it bearable was the fact that JoeRecruiter never ever EVER flies coach. Ever. Or on Southwest Airlines. Ever. Joe LOVES Southwest Airlines, but simply REFUSES to be part of a cattle call unless Hollywood is somehow involved. The soft, soothing strains of "Now boarding all passengers with a 'C' boarding pass" almost NEVER comes to Joe's mind when he thinks about relaxing. Plus, people are freakin' jerks, man.

One sweet old dear nearly mowed Joe down once on a junket from Joe's "house in the hills just below heaven" to a stolen weekend in Las Vegas, in order to get in line TWO people ahead of him. How she got smashed up against the JetWay on the walk up into the aircraft is a mystery for the ages. Even more disturbing was the rumour that someone hissed "Watch your Hips, Granny, cuz next time you go all the way DOWN!" as they entered the passenger compartment. People can be SO insensitive to the elderly.

Where was Joe? Oh yes, the Love Fest. So, there JoeRecruiter was, minding his own business, when Feeley McFinster, the Managing Partner of Dewey Lykitt Ruff called him up right in the MIDDLE of a SERIOUS negotiation with a Junior Partner (not for a job, mind you, but, rather, another Stolen Weekend in Las Vegas. . .talks ARE progressing). Feeley and the Boyz, as Joe likes to call them wanted Joe to come and say "Hidey Ho" to the fellas, explain Joe's recruiting strategy (actually, very simple: Attach a Hundred Dollar Bill to Invisible Fishing Line. Place Bill where Beagle Will See It. When he goes for the bait, make him chase it for a while. When he starts to tire, let him get close to it. When he bends over to retrieve it, shoot him with a Tranquilizer Dart, and throw his ass in a white unmarked van. Works every time), and how using Joe's Firm ('kay, whatEVER, Joe's FIRM. . .please!), can help them with their strategic development. WHAT?

That was call one.

Call Two was this: Lateral Associate Mervys DePasquale de La Smith McDougal Ciccone-Lattimore III. Senior Associate Candidate. Simply UnWILLING to send Joe the required documents without knowing the identity of the firm. Sorry, Joe, I "just can't do it. An ETHICAL recruiter would disclose the name of the firm. . .I'd like to work with you, but if you can't disclose the name of the firm, then I'll have to find another recruiter."

This was easy:

Dear Merv: Thanks for considering us, and please accept our best wishes in finding a suitable recruiter to fulfill your needs. Warm Wishes, JoeRecruiter.

And it really is just that easy. Let's go over this again, with maybe some history, so you guys can get this through your smart but willful heads:

I do NOT care whether or not you think you know who the law firm is. . .I'm still not going to tell you until you send me your resume, your grades, you comp, billing, and rate, and expected comp. And no, I'm not going to tell you the comp level, because I'm probably not going to KNOW it. . .it depends on a HUNDRED factors, many of which I just don't KNOW in the first phone call, and any recruiter who tells you differently is LYING to you. (Listen carefully, even when they tell you a "range" they'll couch it in careful terms: "Well, the RANGE is PROBABLY somewhere between X and Y, depending on experience, but it could be MORE or less." Why bother. I just don't know, until I see YOUR comp, bonus, billables, etc., etc. The GOOD news, by the way, is that, unlike OTHER types of employers, Law Firms rarely try to screw you on salary by lowballing you based on your previous salary/salary history.

I do NOT care if OTHER recruiters disclose the identity of the law firm (by the way, I don't believe you, either. . .I talk to law firm recruiters EVERY DAY, and they all tell me they ask for their name to be withheld). . .Here's the deal. Law firms don't want us to disclose their identity before we receive YOUR information because, in the past, and again, we're SURE that YOU would never do this, but, in the past, maybe ONCE or TWICE, a candidate called one recruiter or another to ask about a position. The typical line was given: "I'm sorry, but I can't disclose the name of the firm until I see your information." The Lawyer said something like "well, how do I know you even really have a job available, you could be making it all up." And, of course, the Legal Recruiter, not having his/her wits about him/her told the candidate the name of the firm. They talked for a little while, and the candidate said they'd send their information, and that was the end of it. Of course, you know how this turned out, right? The candidate turned RIGHT AROUND and applied to the Law Firm, denied ever having contacted ANY recruiter about the position (despite the fact, discovered later, that the position wasn't even posted at the time of first contact), WAITED until the law firm posted the position, and then, when the recruiter protested, denied ever having had a discussion with the recruiter. It turned into a big mess, and put the law firm in the middle of a conflict between the Lawyer and the Recruiter, and EVERYBODY lost.

So NO, I'm NEVER going to tell you the name of the Law Firm until I have something in my hand from you indicating an interest in the job that I told you about, with a bloody TIMESTAMP on it, that can serve as a record of our conversation. Do I ever expect to use it? No, and I never have HAD to, but you're never gonna put me in the position where I'd need to, and the law firm won't let you put them in that position either. IF it's really a problem, at the minimum, you should offer to send an email outlining your interest in the "Real Estate Associate Position with a Major Law Firm in Duck Blind, Arkansas" or whatever, but the law firms rely on Recruiters to keep this information confidential for good reason. It's not about jerking your chain. . .it's about making sure that THEIR chain doesn't get jerked.

While we're on the topic, don't think for a moment that you get "credit" for saving money for a law firm by going around a recruiter and saving the firm money. Any credit you'd get for saving them money spent on a recruiter is more than offset by the ethical questions raised by your going around a recruiter who was only pursuing his/her job at the behest of the firm in question. Furthermore, you should ask yourself this question: Would you really want to WORK with a law firm that APPROVED of this type of unethical behavior? If that's okay with them, what will they do or NOT do in order to avoid paying YOU for legitimate work you've undertaken on their behalf?

More than once, Joe and others have heard stories about Law Firms who've taken a pass on a candidate who comes to them on "ill-gotten" information, particularly when the fact is disclosed later in the process. Joe doesn't KNOW that a Lawyer has ever been FIRED for this, but he DOES know lawyers who 've left law firms they went to under a "cloud," and those relationships just "didn't work out." Do all of us a favour. . .If this is the way you work, don't even bother to call. We WILL find out, we'll make SURE The firm finds out (maybe not directly, but they WILL find out. . .at least the MP will find out), and we'll probably find a way to let the local Bar Committee find out (Recruiters know everyone, and, if we don't know someone, we know someone who knows them).

I do NOT care if you have concerns about your information (well, I DO, but let me explain: we give a very CLEAR guarantee about preserving your confidentiality. In fact, it should BE the case that, in every interaction with a Recruiter, your conversations are confidential. In JoeRecruiter's case, they ALWAYS are, from the first "Hi, Buffy, this is JoeRecruiter at JoeRecruiter's Firm" to the moment you accept the offer).

I do NOT care if you "prefer to wait to discuss "THAT" (whatever THAT is) until we have a better idea of what we're talking about." Guess what? It's NOT your call. I KNOW the law firm. I KNOW the recruiters. I KNOW the job. I'm trying to, I'm sorry to have to say it, PRE-Qualify you. I know you think you're doing me a HUGE favor by returning my call, and you ARE, but so what? That doesn't mean you're qualified for the JOB I have in mind. When I call, I'm purposefully vague so as to save your ass from embarrassment or outright trouble if someone should happen to find out. . .you can always pass it off as "Oh, you know, it was just another one of those DAMN recruiters. . .they call EVERYONE," but when you call me, you'd better be prepared to give me some information about who you are, what you do, how much you make, how much you bill, what you bill at, and your expertise, so I can see if you're a match to the JOB. It's not personal, and you shouldn't take it as such.

And you shouldn't worry that I'm going to take your resume and submit it without your approval. I know there are recruiters who HAVE done that, and maybe some will do it in the future, but I'm not going to, and, even if I did, all you have to say is "I don't recall giving JoeRecruiter permission to present me to you" and that ends it. And JoeRecruiter is very VERY smart, and KNOWS that he can't get paid if he didn't have your permission to present, so I'm not even going to bother.

So do yourself, your fellow lawyers, the Legal Profession, and Legal Recruiters ALL a favor and LOSE THE ATTITUDE. Law Firms need associates and Partners. They want to add the best ones they can find. But they don't have time to call everyone. So they come to me. I want to find the best associates and partners I can. So I call YOU. WHEN I call, you MAY be happy, or you MAY not, but if you think you MIGHT be amenable to a discussion about another option, then you should call me and at least find out about the other position. If YOU are NOT currently interested, but you know your friend Billy Bob McSweeney might be looking, tell Billy Bob to call me.

Because, here's the thing. Even if you DO go ahead and send your info, and it looks good, and I decide to present you, and I send the info (with your permission), the Law Firm may still decide to pass on you. Law Firms being Law Firms, they ALWAYS hold back a little on EXACTLY what they want, and why shouldn't they? If I'm the MP, I know what I'm looking for, but I can't necessarily put it into words. My External Recruiter is there to refine the search and present the LIKELIEST candidates, based on his/her knowledge of ME, my law firm, our practice, and the kinds of lawyers we hire, and wait for feedback, and move from there.

This is why we always say your chances are better with an external. We KNOW it's true, and, here's the thing. . . if External Recruiters weren't adding value to the Lawyer Search process, we wouldn't exist. There'd be NO demand for us, and certainly we wouldn't be making money (OR placements). So hate us all you want, badmouth us all you want. And keep on submitting to those job boards. But when you're ready to find a REAL job, with a REAL salary, and a REAL law firm, call me back. Because I'm ALWAYS looking for good, smart lawyers. And, in my experience, the good, smart lawyers ALWAYS call you back.

Look, I'm not gonna pretend that this profession doesn't have its share of scumbags and lowlifes. . . it does, and perhaps MORE than its share. But you wouldn't indict the entire legal profession because of a few less than perfect examples of lawyerly dignity, would you? Oh, you would. Well, don't extend that to recruiters. The good news is that the scumbags rarely stay around long because, between candidates and Law Firms, news travels VERY fast (JoeRecruiter KNOWS. . .JoeRecruiter's blog has been growing by referral since day one of its publication. . .more than 90% of our hits are by referral. . . right ON, you guys!). See, if you do damage to a candidate in, say, oh, Detroit, the word will be out on you in three days, and NO ONE will ever call you again. Oh, the Law Firms might call, but the candidates NEVER will, and NO candidate, no placement.

Joe learned this lesson well and early. There was this Legal Recruiter named Biff Lazenby. Biff was kewl. He'd been a lawyer, then he became a Legal Recruiter. Did well for a while. But Biff didn't like to wait for ACTUAL Job Openings (some recruiters don't, and that's okay. . .Joe only places for OPEN positions, but you're always welcome to call and chat. . .most good recruiters are like this), and he very often "shopped" resumes to Law Firms with which he had no relationship. Well, a time or two, it worked, and Biff got paid. So he got bolder. Pretty soon, Candidates who'd just been placed would be talking at the Water Cooler, and, Candidate A would say "Well, whaddya know, another Biff Lazenby Candidate!" to Candidate B, who'd say "Bih-wha-wa Huh?", and, before you could say "busted scumbag" Biff's Career was deader than K-Fed's. "Lesson Learned!" said JoeRecruiter.

But we were talking about that damn Love Fest, weren't we? So, Joe called a NUMBER of the Law Firms, given that he was going to have to go on the road with his Dawg and Pony show, and, after 10 long LONG days, Joe is Home and Happenin' and HERE TO TELL YOU that he is absolutely convinced that traveling to meet Law Firm is a CRIMINAL waste of time, as was the visit to Junior Partner's Law Firm (Joe thought that visibility would improve the outcome of the talks. . . did Joe mention that talks are. . .progressing?). On the other hand, the Law Firms DID pay for the trips, Joe flew Business Class, and the FluffyLicious Bed (or whatever) was as comfortable as advertised. The Law Firms even paid for Joe's Blue Cow, which, while unexpected, was very MUCH appreciated.

Joe even managed a Stolen Weekend in Las Vegas. Somehow, from this distance in time and space, traces of last night's conquest still apparent in the suite at the Not AT ALL Over The Top Bellagio Hotel, the continuing talks with Junior Partner seem less crticial.

However, at the risk of making an unintended, but thoroughly delightful and appropriate pun, Joe still has a bone to pick with Mervys DePasquale de La Smith McDougal Ciccone-Lattimore III, Esq., Attorney and Counselor at Law. And all the other Mervys's (Mervyses? Joe's just not sure. . .) out there in the world.

This is JoeRecruiter's take: When a Legal Recruiter calls you, even it's NOT JoeRecruiter (you should BE so lucky), take a moment out of your busy Beagle day, and call the poor sucker back. You never KNOW when things are gonna change. Unless you've been living in a hole, you've seen things change at about half a dozen of the TOP law firms in just the past two months or so, ALL over the country. Joe would not, could not, name names, but just think with Joe: West Coast, East Coast, Central States, New England. . .just to name a few. Mergers, Buyouts, Indictments, Accusations, Partner Defections, the list goes on. It's DEFINITELY worth a moment of your time, now and again, to lift your nose up from that memorandum you're drafting for a senior partner to see what's happening all around you.

And if you've been wondering, for even a few minutes of the day, ANY day, if there's something MORE, or something DIFFERENT, take another moment and place a call yourself. Just make sure you have a cellphone and an external email. Recruiters, while nasty, evil-tempered, vicious, and slow-witted, DO get that confidentiality, subtlety, and discretion are important to their candidates and potential candidates, even if they don't practice them themselves.

Well, that's it. The leeward side of the bed is stirring. Nightlife in Las Vegas awaits. Plus, there's a small possibility that Joe may have NO choice but to take Southwest back home to the little "house in the hills just below heaven." If you, or a family member, have delicate hips, you may want to take another flight. JoeRecruiter says "no cuts!" And I mean it.

Big Sloppy Vegas Style Kisses,



JoeRecruiter

Love Your Recruiter!!!