ThanksGIFTing to y'all from Your JoeR!

Well, well, well! And well, again. It's time for Your JoeRecruiter to give all y'all some nuggets of wisdom and pre-Holiday Cheer. Okay, so not. But Joe has many things to say, and, as in times past, and, quite frankly, re-past, not many in thoid poisson. As it were. Joe doesn't know what "as it were" means, but it sounds terribly fancy, so Joe will say it from time to time. . . . as it were. It seems like terribly clever people say it a lot when they're trying to assure you they're terribly clever, don't it? Yup. So, every twice in a while, Joe will be doing that from now on. Just in case.

Today, we will be having a veritable boo-FAY of topics. Which means that the meds haven't yet kicked in, probably. When Joe remembers to, Joe will absolutely number them. Different numbers, too, just to be sure. Let us begin. And, for kicks, let us start with number one. No sense starting off on the wrong foot this early in the game.

1. ". . .And the Oozing Sincerity From Every Pore Award Goes To. . .": Let's start at the very beginning. As Julie Andrews said, it's "a very good place to start. What is WITH James J. Sandman, Esq., former Big Head of Cheese, I mean, Head Cheese, of the DC Bar, Partner of Ahhhnold and Pohhhtuhh, and other fayncee stuff? I mean, foh realz! Did you guys read this? All the way through? Without a Bromo to hand?

Thing is, Mr. Sandman was right about most everything he writed. Associates aren't just in it for the money, blah blah, satisfaction blah blah, clients don't wanna take it all up the yazz blah blah, so on and so forth blah blah . . . and blah. Bleaahhhh! Eck. Feh. ACK! (Sorry, hairball).

But the overweaning insincerity, and the little walk through "social conscientiousness-land" was a bit much, even for Your JoeR to stomach. (blechhh!).

I mean, it's one thing if you're like Joe's friend Dudley DoMe, and you make 14 Gazillion dollahs a year, and give most of it away, because that how you roll, baby, but Joe has a bit of a problem taking advice from a partner, who isn't exactly KNOWN for giving all his money away, sitting in judgment of newly minted Associates and telling them they shouldn't be thinking about the money, but rather thinking about doing things more for the social good.

Are you kidding? Sheesh! And Joe thought Crack Alley Sally was hitting the pipe a little too hard! Sandman is the right name for it, babylove, you are livin' in DREAMLAND!

Now, Joe knows that most partners don't make nearly as much as the average Associate thinks they make. But they still make a helluva lot more than the average Associate makes, and that, after all, is the damn thing. Moreover, I don't think this lecture impressed any clients either.

That sound you hear in the background is the sound of many MANY clients simultaneously coughing up a hairball, or yacking up what they had thought was a tasty piece of Hamachi, at the idea of a partner standing in front of God and everybody and saying "Oh, hell yeah, it's the Associate raise that's going to force us to jack our prices to you, and not our desire to preserve our partner distribution, because we don't wanna take it in the ass, so we'd rather make sure our CLIENTS take it in the ass, or even better, the Associates, because, by now, they should be used to it."

What cracks Your JoeR up about this is that El Sando actually dared to aim the word "disingenuous" at someone not himself. That takes solid steel cojo, that's all Joe gotta say about that there.

But wait, there's more.

Joe agrees that Associate salaries are too high. But that's all ya gotta say. Associate salaries are too high. And they're phony. Because the firms are just gonna, well, it rhymes with duck, the associates, in order to make them pay for the increase, so they don't actually get more money, they just work more hours.

It is NOT necessarily true that the firms will raise the hourly rate, because they'll have calculated how many more hours they want the associates to work in order to pay for the raise. They WILL use that as the excuse to raise rates, but that's just what it is, an excuse. Some firms will have to raise rates, of course, either because they can't get enough work to cover the nut on the raise, or because they want a higher payout, or just because they're poorly managed, but, if a firm knows how to hire, has enough work, and has the right attrition level, it doesn't have to jack its rates. However, doesn't have to and won't are two entirely different breeds of cat. And that is all Joe has to say about Associate raises. For now.

2. Pay Us More, Say MPs. Thousand of Associates Hospitalised For Hysterical Fits of Laughter! : Somebody sent Joe an article on raising Managing Partner pay to CEO level. Joe doesn't know what this means. First of all, it's a non-sequitur. Joe would need MUCH more information. When Joe thinks CEO, Joe thinks "of a major corporation, with, like, 50 THOUSAND employees," and, in that case, Joe says, "Oh, hell yeah."

But, based on the cursory research Joe has done (primarily in the area of his quite adorable navel, one must admit), most MPs do better than the "CEOs" of small, family-owned and private companies of similar size already. So Joe doesn't understand why this has come up. Unless whatever ill-thinking MP that floated this idea thinks they should be paid on par with, whomever, Jack Welch or Steve Jobs, or someone.

I mean, if they want to be paid co-equal with Warren Buffet, I'm down with that (last I heard, he made about $300K/year). And I'm okay with paying them co-equal with Bill Gates, too (a buck a year). I'll even pay it myself. Applications may be left with my Business Agents, Bialystock and Bloom.

But let's think about this for a minute. The premise of this is all goofy. First of all, the reason CEOs of companies are paid the way they're paid, theoretically, is because they are paid to INCREASE SHAREHOLDER VALUE. So I don't think we can entertain the notion until law firms become public entities in the first place. But let's put that aside for a minute, and just say, what the hell. Let's say they don't have to be public entities. Fine.

How do we assess CEOs on the basis of increasing the value of the firm? Who decides? Well, in MY estimation, it would have to be SOME kind of a stakeholder. It can't be the partners, because they're too close to the action. . .their ox is too easily gored. So, it has to fall to the (shuddah!) associates. Given that, how many CEOs (MPs) would get a raise? Hmmm? How many MPs would get fiddy cent? Just asking.

Don't get Joe wrong, Joe loves the idea of paying MPs co-equal with CEOs, but as Joe's great-aunt Suzannah Suffragette McSuccotash was fond of saying "Equal Pay for Equal Work, y'all." And, admittedly, Joe's view on this is, how shall we say this? Ah, yes. . .despoiled. Joe's cousin Wiley R. Crayn (the Crayns never were very clever at naming the offspring the sprang from their unsavoury loins), is the richest rich person Joe ever knew. Personally, Joe means.

Wiley was a tightwad. But he believed in paying a full-day's pay for a full-day's work. Sadly, for his workers, Wiley's full-day consisted of 24-hours work with no breaks, not even to see a man about a horse, if you know what Joe means. Joe thinks that there are a few MPs out there that think the same way old Wiley did, but, when the scope is aimed up THEIR tuchus, things all of a sudden are viewed from an entirely different perspective.

Joe thinks that the CEO pay story is unifinished, at best. And there are a few details that need to be made a LOT clearer. Perhaps, once those details fall into place (perhaps less with a bang, than a whimper), we will ALL be in a better position to evaluate this suggestion.

For now, Joe's recommendation to Law Firm CEOs, COOs, MPs, and LMNOPs would be to take what money you can get, and sit on it for a little while longer. We'll get back to you as soon as we can. Really. We MEAN it.

Love Your Recruiter!



JoeRecruiter



http://joerecruiter.blogspot.com

p.s. Could Joe get a little proxy for this here sandwich?

Tough Love For Associates. About Time Sez JoeR.

Your JoeRecruiter is in a giddyhappy mood. One might ask "Why, JoeRecruiter, are you in such a giddyhappy mood?" and one would have a perfect right to do so. Of course, your JoeRecruiter, being a cranky soul, might ignore the question, as he is wont to do from time to time.

But not this time. Oh, HELL no. In point of fact, your JoeRecruiter is delighted, nay, frankly thrill-ed to be able to answer this particular question. In a minute.

But first, your JoeR has to tell you about ShuShu Humuhumunukunukuapua'a. Your JoeR had to quickly verify the correct spelling in his combination Ig-Pay Atin-Lay Ictionary-Day and Hawaiian Cookbook, Illustrated-Day (thank Od-Gay, Oh-Jay was Orrect-Kay, as Ew-zuwal-day, aturally-day).

But here's the thing about ShuShu HumuHu (for short, and you can ANK-bay at-thay). ShuShu is a HO. Sorry. An Oh-Hay. Not in a bad way. Not that it matters, or anything. Far be it from your JoeR to criticise anybody for their stuff, right? Your JoeR isn't a saint, after all. Just ask Junior Partner. She has PLENTY to say about your JoeRecruiter, let Joe tell you. But ShuShu . . .well, ShuShu is a little frisky. And he's playing it fast and loose, if you take Joe's meaning. Very fast. And VERY loose. Not that there's anything wrong with that. But, you know, once bitten. . .and somebody, sometime, is gonna see the marks. And then where will you be? Joe knows! Junior Partner wouldn't talk to Joe for WEEKS! What can Joe say? Joe heals slowly.

Which brings us to this Associate thing. Miz Flouncy McGriddle, herself an apparently highly qualified and knowledgable consultant type, just informed your JoeR, and apparently the whole legal community that [prepare to gasp!] by their fifth year in the profession, {Note: Joe thought it was a brother/sisterhood, and is trying to digest this}, upwards of 80% of the novitiates {see!} wander off to find something else to do [gasp!]. Joe knows!

Miz McGriddle says that this comes as a surprise to no one. Well, with all due respect to Miz McGriddle, it shocked the hell outta your JoeR. Okay, maybe that's a little strong. How 'bout "nonplussed." Fine, Joe doesn't know what that means. "Bemused." Nope, don't know what that means, too. "Flummoxed?" Still nothin'. Abashed? Twitterpated? Pole-axed? Discombobulated? What about bifurcated? Joe just tossed that in. How about defenestrated? It doesn't have anything to do with anything, either, but Joe has ALWAYS dug that word.

The Griddler (Joe's new term for Miz McGriddle) even points out the lack of work-life balance as a problem. Joe thinks this is a load of, Joe means, an interesting thing to say, given that anyone as smart as a potential lawyer OUGHT to know what they're getting themselves into, one would think, sometime before they actually commit to going to law school. I mean, seriously, you have stratospheric IQs, there are 426 shows about Lawyers on TV, and it never even ONCE crossed your mind that you might have to work more than a 40-hour week in order to earn more in a month than your parents earned in a freakin' year?

Honestly, just how stupid ARE you? For frick's sake! Did you really, truly think they were gonna hand you $160,000.00 just because they thought the way you chugged that beer bong was somehow so much better than the way all those other 3Ls BEFORE you chugged beer bongs? Give Joe a break! In fact, give us ALL a break, and apply to an accounting program, please, before it's too late. But let's move on, before Joe has a fit of apoplexy and dies before he finishes gouging out what little soul you have left.

The Griddler, bless her, has some neato!, super!, fabu! steps firms can take to rev up their Associate retention. That is SO great! Let's look at them. They're super fabulously cool, and neat, and super, and great! And marvy!, and groovy! And Marvy! And some junk! And just the BEST! EVER! Wow! Joe is SO EXCITED! For REALS! Here we go! Don't hurt yourself! I MEAN it! Really! Joe means it! REALLY! Ready? Okay! Okay. Wait. Okay. Hold on. Okay, wait.

Okay, first. Joe doesn't know what this means. Grid sez firms should broaden their efforts beyond those regarded as, um, "keepers." But she also says attrition is good. Joe sez, "Ow. My head hurts." Besides, it seems that this is sort of addressed below (see below).

Okay, second. Okay. Second, La Gridde says that firms should get down with their alumni networks. Joe totally agrees. But firms already do this. And she says also that they should pay for outplacement services for attorneys who end up not being such a good fit, and also that they should provide a professional career consultant for every attorney. Sounds good, but Joe is wondering about something. First of all, right on with the whole outplacement thing, but didn't Joe already address this whole issue in our last episode? Yes, Joe in fact already addressed this issue in our last episode.

But second, and almost as important, it seems to Joe that the whole idea of providing career consultants would probably be a monumental waste of cash because presumably these able, gifted, and otherwise intelligent attorneys have probably had many, MANY chances to be career consulted before this stage in their lives, , and clearly, it didn't take. It seems to Joe that there's no benefit to be accrued by continuing to throw good money after bad.

As Joe's Wise Old Uncle, Scooter, used to say, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result. He used to also say some garbage about catching more flies with honey, but that's gross and Joe doesn't wanna talk about that right now.

But wait! There's more! Gridella de Ville suggests that firms find other roles in the firm. Joe wondered, as he was reading, what other roles there could be, but Miz McGriddle was prepared for that question. She is so on her game, you would not believe it. These other roles are, like, non-equity partner; director of recruiting (I guess Joe can kiss that dream job goodbye, snif); director of professional dvelopment; director of marketing; and director of pro bono work. Hot Zing! The Griddler is a Pluperfect Genius! No foolin'. The scales have fallen from mine eyes. I guess director of snotty and irony laden external publications was all full up. Pity.

All great people have a lackey, I guess, and Miz McGriddle apparently has one too. Joe is guessing. Because, in a lob deep from center field comes a quote from Binstock, who, Joe is guessing, is the Igor to the Griddler's Baron von FronkenSteen (Joe kids, a little. Actually, Binstock is the lovely and talented Dan Binstock with BCG Attorney Search, who's been like a daughter, no, niece, no, cub scout, no, iguana, no, whippoorwill, YES! to JoeR).

Anyways, in an earth-shattering reveal, Binstock (how funny would it be if his name was actually Igor, though?), anyway, Binstock reveals, for THE FIRST TIME EVER, that a book of business often reigns supreme (so take THAT, Mary Wilson!), and that a beagle's primary loyalty seems to be to their own career, and NOT to a particular career (just in case anyone was confused). Joe, for one, was absolutely hoist on his own petard. Which is, frankly, saying something. Because, prior to today, Joe didn't even know he HAD a petard. Fortunately, it's much prettier than you might otherwise think.

Imagine. . .a book of business often reigns supreme. Thanks for that Binstock. You and Grid. . .the cutting edge of beagle-istic thought.

Anyway, the upshot of all of this forward thinking is that the more, that is to say the most forward-thinking of the forward-thinking firms are providing business development training to all of their associates, and let me quote this, becuz it's cool, "as a way of preparing the keepers for partnership and encouraging all associates to practice fundamentals like client service, relationship-building and networking." They don't tell us what's going to happen to the non-keepers. But, I guess, since they're broadening the scope on "keepers" pretty soon everyone will be a keeper. Which, presumably, will kill the whole "attrition good" theory. Which will mean, eventually, "attrition bad." Which will mean, eventually "keepers bad." Which will, presumably mean "attrition good" once again. See, things balance out.

Finally, Miz McGriddle suggests that firm offer management training to partners and senior associates, presumably to keep them from getting Agita. Or verklempt. Or both. Depends on the day. And what you had for lunch, sometimes. And sometimes, what your JoeR had for lunch.

Honestly, the idea of providing Management Training to partners and senior associates is not a bad idea. But WHO is going to provide the training? And, more importantly, will they listen? Lawyers come out of school, for the most part, without even a speck of management training, one would think they'd already know this, and either go back for some, or take advantage of the opportunity to get some. But in virtually every case, lawyers who don't already have a management background never submit themselves for any additional training.

But, let's be fair. . .nobody wants to go back for much more of anything, if they don't have to. Why, your own very JoeR took about as much Frab as he ever intends to take in FrabJabuLab School. Naturally, all of us get our Ploids and Noids recertified every two years, as, of course, you would, but, outside of that, why bother?

As usual, there's nothing new under this sun. But, we can only hope that, like Superman, perhaps, another day, another sun will shine brightly in the (Joe can never remember. . .) Western (?) sky, when, presumably, The Griddler's amazing powers will, at that point, be relevant.

Until then, remember,


Love Your Recruiter!



JoeRecruiter



http://joerecruiter.blogspot.com/



p.s. I wish I was in Tijuana, eatin' barbecued iguana (name it).

BigPapa MauMau and Crack Alley Sally

A long time ago, in a Galaxy, Far, Far Away. . . JUST KIDDING! Besides, your JoeR is Pretty Damn Sure you can't even USE them there words any more. In that particular arrangement, anyway. Joe will check. Joe will check with Taxxy McDancer! Taxxy McDancer is your JoeR's name for his new most favourite Lawyerly Beagle EVER! Lawyer! CPA! Break Dancer! RockStar! He Does It All!

Actually, Joe doesn't know Taxxy McDancer.

Joe's new BFF Studdly McHotty, Jr., however, DOES.

Studdly Junior (Little Stud, to his friend(s), much to Joe's discomfort), is ALSO a Legal Recruitist, and met Taxxy the RockStar at a HooHah Hootenanny for the Future Rich, or somesuch nonsense. Joe doesn't really know, because Joe doesn't really care. Funny how that works, idn't it?

Or maybe they danced. Not quite sure on the details.

Anyway, Taxxy is a RockStar. And a Marvelous Dancer. And can fillet a (an?) LLC with Laser-like precision. Or something.

Which reminds JoeR, go get a nice piece fish for lunch.

And apparently, he's cute, too.

JUST KIDDING!

Joe totally made that up.

Joe wouldn't know a cute guy face if it walked up and bit him on the butt. And if a cute guy face, or, to be dead honest, if a cute anything face walked up and bit Joe on the butt, it would TOTALLY piss off Junior Partner, given that she was recently scolded for SPANKING your JoeR on the butt.

True, it WAS in front of JoeR's One and Only Mama. And True, she DID make your JoeR call her BIG Mama. And, yes, it is ALSO True that she filmed it and sent copies to Joe's entire High School Graduating class.

But the part about Joe singing the entire Star Spangled Banner while dressed in a Flag Diaper is TOTALLY false. It was a completely WHITE, regular diaper.

But your JoeR got completely off track, didn't we? Yes, we did. That is so not okay. Kidding again. Most beagles wouldn't know the difference, anyway. . .your JoeR reads Opinion Letters by the ream, and legal writing by the boxful (recruiter, 'member?). Joe has decided that ADD is the official unofficial avocation of most beagles, which is a good thing, because Joe has decided that smart and floxipated go together like, well, how can Joe say this?, like. . .um. . .Got It!

Like, your date orders Lobster, and s/he is SO putting out. But your Joe would NEVER say that, let alone let it go to print. Never Never Never. Ever. What were we talking about? Oh, yeah, off track.

So, what do BigPapa MauMau and Crack Alley Sally have to do with one another? Well, as you know, BigPapa MauMau is Joe's One True Father-type Father's Really And For True Father's Name, and Crack Alley Sally is Joe's Friend, Adviser, Confidant, Early Warning System, Bodyguard, Bank, and, apparently, Future Past Aluma-us-ae-whatever (LSAT 178. . .WTF? Hand me that pipe!), and, she also makes the cutest little Holiday Decorations for Lovely Table Displays, or something, according to Junior Partner (Joe only reports, he does not decide, also according to Junior Partner). Joe says . . . .nevermind what Joe says.

What brought this on is that, finally, for the first time in, like, Joe-dunno, a century, there seems to be a "loosening-up" in some of the law firms. A change in the way firms (some of them) are focusing on a totality of metrics. Or, perhaps a better way to explain this is, a moving away from JUST metrics.

Over here, one firm has developed a two-tier comp plan. You can be a machine, and get paid more for just grinding out raw numbers of hours. Or, you can make a little less, and have a life. Joe digs this. There was a time when Joe was all about the dollars, baby. And the hours. Still is, mostly. But not as much. A little less. Now, this law firm says, hey, it's a menu. You can pick. Could be meat, could be cake, as the saying goes. Joe says, Right On.

Over here, a firm says, wisely, timesheets are stupid. They lie. They misrepresent what lawyers do, and they don't present an accurate account of the value of what lawyers DO. Besides that, they make people think that the value of lawyer work lies ONLY in the representation of lawyering work as an hour-by-hour thing, which it so is not. Joe agrees.

Joe's Dear, Dear Friend and Enema, Feeley McFinster, Esq., Liar and Attorney-At-Law, Lawyer and Shyster, Huckster and Counselor, is a big, HUGE, scumbag, I mean advocate, of timesheets, and he accounts for every second of every day. Sometimes two or three times, just to be sure.

Feeley's a character. For example, he never actually lies, really. Joe just said that to be mean. He quite truthfully tells you he's giving you a Prostate Massage, (assuming you're a male person of the male gender, and that you do, in fact, HAVE a prostate gland), at no additional charge whatsoever. However, a person like Joe-self might uncharitably characterise this as Feeley, um, how can Joe say this?

Ah, yes, let's just call it, uh, " . . . .bending you over the desk and shagging you like a crazy, angry monkey, or a sugared-up ten-year old with an authority problem. . . "

Joe knows, Joe knows. Not all lawyers, and certainly not all Law Firms, would do this kind of stuff, and certainly if anybody found out about this kind of nonsense, they'd put a swift and final stop to it, and you'd be right. And certainly, you're absolutely correct that there's probably only one lawyer out there like Feeley, and thank [insert here] for that.

It's also true that flat pricing, or value pricing, or whatever-the-hell-you-wanna-call-it-pricing ain't no panacea either, thank you very much. Everything has its own set of problems. Fine, Joe'll stip to all of that. But Joe's sticking to his (toy, sigh) guns on this one. Timesheets suck, because they suck, because they suck. And they suck because they suck.

Moreover they suck because grownups shouldn't have to account for their time like five-year olds, and Joe wouldn't do it, ever, and never will. And if for no other reason, SOMEBODY oughtta sack up, and the next time someone asks an ADULT to account for their time, say "No. I'm not a five-year old, and I don't ACCOUNT for my time like a child! I'm done with this. If you don't trust me to do my job, and give you fair value for the money, then you don't trust me enough to do the job, so maybe we need to reconsider our relationship. If your timesheet is more important to you than our relationship, I think we're done. Take a day, and think about it, and let me know tomorrow."

And the Officers need to stand up to their boards, and the boards need to stand up to their Stockholders. It's not hard. Trust Joe. Joe IS a stockholder. Joe doesn't need to be told how many minutes Law Firm B spent drafting Agreement A on Matter K. Nobody Cares. Nobody. Unless they're a freak. How many Law Firms want to be known for representing freaks? Okay, Entertainment Law Firms don't have to answer. And Certain Billionaires don't count. Or Criminals. Or Joe's Lawyers. Or Junior Partner.

Joe would LOVE to know how many actual grownups elected to pursue the profession of law. Not counting the above.

Over Here, right HERE, a Law Firm has said, "Hey, You, we're not hiring any more Associates, for a minute, so we can focus on Laterals. Good Laterals. Tasty Laterals. Smoky Laterals. Well-Seasoned Laterals, but with a hint of spice, and a robust, tanginess that should go well with a nice juicy red. . . .sorry, Joe was watching a certain programme on a certain channel, and, well, you know, the right lateral can make your mouth water. Maybe that's just Joe.

Joe just realised that he should have explained that he meant Lateral Partners, as opposed to lateral Associates. Sorry, it's a recruiting thing. And a Joe being Lazy thing. It was easier to just tell you Partners once, down here, than go through and change that WHOLE paragraph up there, and also teach you how we think in the recruiting world.

Anyone who tells you different is a liar. Liar, Liar, LIAR. Associate, Lateral, Group, Merger Partner. They may have different terminology, but, seriously, if a recruiter is talking to them, they're ALREADY a lateral, so to say, "Oh, we mean a lateral ASSOCIATE, or a lateral PARTNER, or a lateral GROUP, is just grandstanding, and they're showing off for you. Newby Lawyers are of no interest to recruiters because they're worth no money, and it's not worth the firm to pay to recruit them, so if a recruiter is talking to a lawyer, by definition, that lawyer IS a lateral attorney. Period. End of off-topic Grammar rant, sort of.

Back to a topically-related rant. This was a VERY good move. Good for the Law Firms, good for Lawyers, good for the Recruiting industry. Here's why. For the firms, they can get VERY focused on getting good Partners, and culling the chaff. All Law Firms should cull, and get tight. They should weed out the weaker partners, send them on their way, and use their recruiters to help them out-place those attorneys to other firms who might be delighted to have them, but who don't fit THEIR model.

Understand this; it's very important. I know it doesn't fit certain recruiting organisation ethics guidelines, but it's the truth and SOMEBODY has to say it.

There are very few really bad attorneys. There are a few, but, on the whole, the profession, like herds of buffalo, or reindeer, or wolves, tends to, um, eliminate the sicker, weaker, less, "survivable" members, as it should. AND it should. It should do it better, faster, more, but, over time, the systems generally clean the pool pretty well. It could, and should be better, but it's okay. All right, it's not, you know, okay, but it's almost okay. Okay.

Informal systems between law firms also operate, and those systems are in place between recruiters and lawyers, recruiters and law firms, and even between recruiters. It's not as smooth a process, or even as discreet (or even as discrete-non-math-majors, look it up), as it once was, but, again, it does exist.

So, a system of systems (a Meta-System) does exist. Recruiters are an important part of the system. "[Recruiting Organisation]" has kind of screwed it up, because it is stupid too, but [Recruiting Organisation] came about because of unethical recruiters who were short-sighted, didn't understand the profession, didn't understand lawyers, and didn't believe in the importance of law, and only cared about fees. Most of them are gone.

The rest will be gone when Law Firms get back to caring about Lawyers, and the profession, and that will happen when they start to pay attention to Lawyering again, and it's starting to happen again already, but it too will take time.

So, here's how it works, how it used to work, how it should work, how it will again, all kind of mixed together, like a lovely, tasty, high-fiber, nutritious, and yet, stunningly delicious salad (you wouldn't know it, but your Joe hasn't had lunch yet, and is Craving a Salad. . .admit it, you NEVER would have guessed):

Meet Sherman Fetlock. He is so ca-yute! Nice to his mama. Has a bulldog. Bridget. Not kidding. Good Lawyer. Works for Isa Goodit Hurtzel Ittle. Like Joe Said. He's good. However, as Tony the Tiger is reputed to have said, "They're Grrrrreat!". Their nick in the industry is "iggy." They hate it. But we love it, so Iggy, it is. In fact, since it looks so cool in lowercase, it's just iggy. As in "So big, and yet so small, iggy atty says charity begins at home," or something.

Sherman doesn't know it yet, but he isn't gonna make partner at iggy. That's okay, because iggy doesn't know that Sherm is in play. As of now. Joe wants Sherm's pelt to decorate the office of a client who wants someone who tastes suspiciously like Sherm. Smell that? Smells like fee.

See, this is good because everybody wins. Sherm and iggy were never gonna happen. Iggy will be all "Sherm, you are dead to me." And Sherm will be all, "Iggy, I want to have your children, really and for true." Joe will be all "Sherm, come with me, and I will sell you for caysh, and life will be good for the JoeBo, and I will buy many toys, most of them made of latex," and FirmBee (the LawFirm to which Joe is going to sell Sherm like a Crayzee Hookuh) will be like "Oh, Sherm, you BigHottMaing! You make me Shuddah! You are SO fine! Talk Legal to me, Daddy!" because, even though Sherm isn't good enough for Iggy he is SO much more than good enough for FirmBee (although your JoeR will be all "What are you TALKING about? You are WAY prettier than those other Law Firms. Would Joe even be here if I didn't think you were the best Law firm of all? You know. . . .Joe wasn't gonna say this, but, Joe could spend his time with ANY Law Firm. . . and Joe chose YOU. Joe picked Sherm especially for YOU. Because Joe cares about YOU. Not enough to drop the annoying third person thing, but, you know. . . a lot").

So, at the end of the day (Joe still dares to dream, a little), week (still dreaming), okay, month (oh, please!), century (closer), era (okay), wrapped in swaddling clothes, and lying [no, that's it], your Joe will deliver one Sherman T. Fetlock, Esquire, to the sweaty hands of FirmBee, cash the check, and give the money to Junior Partner, (Joe understands his role in life perfectly), who will place it in her account, and never give even a dime of it back to Joe, (and is completely fine with it, really), and who will spend virtually every cent of it within fifteen minutes online, (despite the fact that he works like a dog/mule/ox/elephant every second of every day), and never even, you know, thank Joe, or, you know, buy him anything, not even a cracker, (and does everything for everybody else, and nobody ever shows any appreciation), and send him on his merry way, (someone tell Joe why he freakin' breaks his back for these ingrates anyway, please, wouldja?). What were we talkin' about? Oh, yeah, Sherman Fetlock, Cleveland Housewife, and Mother.

So, back in the day, if Sherman were struggling, the Network might have been kicking in. Joe isn't saying, I'm just sayin'. Here's how it might go. Of course, Joe isn't saying, Joe's just sayin'. Because Joe would NEVER do this. Nor would anyone in any law firm, ever. Never. Never Never NEVER. Ever. Got That?

Sherman is a good lawyer. Really Good. Really REALLY Good. But this is iggy. Iggy Lawyers are the Best. I mean, really, REALLY the best. Sherman will never make Partner. We like him here at iggy. We like him awful. We even love him. A lot. We wanna take him home, and hug him and squeeze him, and call him George. But he will never be partner. Never. Never Ever. Ever. Because here at Iggy, we'll take you home, and call you George, and we'll fall in love with you, and we might even marry you.

We'll for sure take you home and let you have as much sex as you want with us, in all the positions you want with us, for as long as you want with us, as many times as you want with us, and we'll for sure bring the party favours with us, and we'll almost certainly pay for the lube that we bring with us, and we might even spring for a Hotel Room in which you hook up with us, at least once, and maybe even more times than just once, for you to hook up with us.

But one thing we won't do, ever, is make you a partner if you don't have it, and if you don't have it, you don't. Really, you just don't. And if you don't have it, you never will. And no matter how much we love you, and no matter how great you are in the sack, and no matter how cute you are, or how hot you are, or how much we care about you, and we really, REALLY care about you, Sherm, you will never EVER make partner. Never Ever. EVER.

So, if I'm the MP of iggy, I might call up a recruiter, say, Oh, hell, let's call him, uh, Fred, the Recruiter. Because that's SO not the name of any recruiters we know. Or that know any recruiters we know. Or that are related to any recruiters who know anybody that knows anybody that knows anybody that we know. You know? Right.

So, Fred, who doesn't know anybody infinity that we know infinity recruiters infinity that we know law infinity squared, right? Just checking, because we SO would never approve of this kind of monkey business, nor would anybody in a law firm blah blah infinity blah blah squared, right? okay. good. okay, here we go. i, uh, we, uh, they, uh, that is to say, someone, mean it this time. SO not kidding. Comin' atcha. No foolin'. Ready-ready.

Oh For Godsake! The MP calls your ass up and it says "Hey, You! This is MP here. I have an outstanding attorney, and, anywhere else, he'd have a chance, and, in fact, would probably already BE a partner, but, here at iggy, that will never happen. Informally, our general philosophy is to try to help these people find a meaningful place somewhere else where they have a chance to shine, because here, if they can't make partner, their chance to have a meaningful career is effectively at an end, and we hate to see that happen to anybody.

I want to be clear, this is a great attorney, he just doesn't have a future HERE. It'd be great if you could help this person out. We love him, he's a great attorney, he's just not going to be able to be as successful here as he could be somewhere else. In fact, to be blunt, he isn't going to be able to be successful here period. His career here, is over. Clearly I'll do my best to keep the news from spreading, but time is of the essence, and the clock is ticking."

Obviously, that call is going to be different with each MP, and between each MP and their recruiter, depending on the level of comfort, how well they know you, if they feel they can trust you, and a lot of other factors. It is a frank violation of so many ethical rules, Joe can't even begin to count. On the other hand, you get the chance to save the careers of so many absolutely great lawyers whose only mistake is that they're not a perfect fit for the firm they're at now.

These stories are legion. It happens every day. That's why Joe HATES it when the first question out of an MP's mouth is "how big is the book?" Who cares, you moron? That's freaking irrelevant. It's irrelevant, because by the time you hire this bozo, all those numbers are going to change anyway. This is Joe's list of what you should ask, and what you NEED to know. By the way, they're not necessarily the same thing.

Also known as "How to Find, and Hire, the Perfect Lawyer" by Your JoeR.

What you should ask/what you need to know:

1. Do This Lawyer's Clients Like Her? From the Beginning of the Matter to the End of the Matter, does the client's opinion change, and if so, does it go from worse to better, or better to worse. Yeah, wise guy. Don't laugh. Books (books of business) are composed of clients. If clients don't like the lawyer, ain't no bidness. Ain't no bidness, ain't no book. Buh bye.

2. Does the recruiter Like The Lawyer? As a person, does the recruiter LIKE the Lawyer. Not what the recruiter thinks of the Lawyer, but the Person. Lawyering mostly is between people. Even transactional work is a lot between people. What does the recruiter think? And again, it's not "how hard have you been told this here lawyer works, Billy Bob?" It's "what do you THINK?"

Tell the recruiter "whatever God you believe in decided to punish you in the worst way possible and now, you are me. You get to decide whether or not this beagle is a Foine addition to our team here at Eeny Meeny Miney and Urrrrp. Decide." It is always helpful at times like this to play a lovely, lonely, sad, lugubrious funeral dirge in the background.

(Note: Goatwhore's Funeral Dirge for the Rotting Sun comes highly recommended. Joe has long requested that Maurice Ravel's Pavane for a Dead Princess be played at HIS funeral; water finds its own level. Also, if Joe may say so, the music is somewhat uncharacteristic for Ravel, but clearly modernistic, very tightly composed, and somewhat frisky for a death composition . . . . come to think of it, FORGET IT! I want something NICE for when I die, you heartless jerks!). What? Oh, yes. Decide.

3. What does the non-lawyer staff at the current place of work think of the attorney? This is huge. Yuge! Because if the non-beagles in his current shack don't like him, it's almost a guarantee that YOUR staff won't like him. Why? Because you know that before the paint in his new office is even dry, YOUR staff will be on the phone to people who know people who know people at his old office, LONG before he leaves, to get the 4-1-1. No, baby, nobody calls directly, because, if they did, they could never truthfully tell you, "I didn't call anyone at his office, nor did anyone I know, nor did anyone I KNOW call anyone I know." See, absolutely truthful.

But weeks before a new attorney starts in your office, the non-attorney staff knows everything about him. Yeah, baby. Everything. EV. RY. THING. Uh Huh. That too. Even what he says, or moans, whimpers, or shouts, just before. Usually, that becomes his secret private nickname. You should hear yours. Trust Joe, it's a freakin' howl.

Here's Uncle Joe's magical test to find out if you're a stud or a dud. Walk down the hall. Does the conversation stop? That's a good sign. Look at each and every one of the NL staff, right in the eye. Each and every one. Boys, Girls, Others. All of 'em. Smile. Don't say a word. Just smile. Friendly, Jackass, I mean, you thoughtful soul, not dirty. Go to the potty, get a drink of water, some coffee, stretch your legs, do some Jumping Jacks, whatever. 'Kay. Go back to your office. Keep the door open. Listen. Silence is bad. Murmurs are good. Loud is good. Anything in between is bad. And the rest, well, send Joe an email. With pictures.

4. What do other lawyers, judges, judicial staff, and other people with whom this lawyer works closely think of him/her? Ask for references, and call them yourself. Don't ask your recruiter to, because s/he isn't YOU. You're looking for your gut to tell you what you think when you listen to them talk to you about the lawyer.

5. NOW, look at the book. Don't look at the numbers, so much, because they will ALL change on some level, especially when Scooter the Lawyer decides to come and snuggle with you and all the other lawyers, cuz all them lawyers at his OLD place were all mean and stuff, but he LIKES you guys. A'yeah. Look at his clients, especially with regard to the TYPES of clients. Look at YOUR clients. Because when you screw up, and [diety] knows, you WILL screw up, a bunch of them will go with him, because clients don't like law firms, regardless of what they told you in MP school. Clients don't like Law Firms, they like lawyers. They could give a--rhymes with, hmmmm, schmuck--about Law Firms, regardless of what they tell you.

RANT WARNING! RANT WARNING! RANT WARNING! THIS IS NOT A DRILL. REPEAT. THIS IS NOT A DRILL. Why Law Firms spend millions of dollars on Branding and Marketing and not even five hundred dollars on a single 3 Credit Hour undergraduate class on Cognitive Psychology is beyond Joe. Especially when MIT has put 1700 of its classes online. For free. How stupid ARE you people? Sorry. Uninformed. And you wonder why you aren't more profitable? And you're worried about this lawyer's BOOK? He should worry about YOUR business practices, Saints preserve us. RANT ENDS HERE. PLEASE RESTORE PROTECTIVE DEVICES TO READY STATUS. SOUND ALL CLEAR.

6. Does his leg go all wonky when you scratch his side? House-trained? Good Hygiene? Manners? Funny? Nice to the help? Don't kid yourself, all of these are important. Especially the side-scratching. If a beagle can't entertain you for free, he's no damn good. Besides, it's funny. And funny is good. If your JoeR was funny, imagine how much you'd like him. I KNOW, me too!

7. Take the Lawyer to lunch. Not breakfast, unless it's rush. Why, you ask? Because lunch is freakin' busy. You want to see how the lawyer actually treats the help, unless you're a bigjerk and are a jerk to the help, too, in which case, why are you reading this blog, because you're too stupid, oops, too stuck in your evil, Joe means, um, Old Fashioned, ways to take the advice anyway, and you deserve all the punishment you're gonna get, too. So there! Sorry. Some crazed bunny of a junior lawyer just rushed in here and put his bunny fingers over Joe's and FORCED Joe to write the most mean things EVER!

That has been happening with WAY too much regularity around here, lately. . . ever since Joe ran out of those cute little pills. Nasty tasting but so cute. And those nice young men in their clean white coats. I miss them. . .they were so nice. And so polite. Always bundling Joe up in a jacket and escorting one everywhere Joe went. . .yeah. . . where were we? Oh yeah. . .lunch.

So, you take the beagle to lunch. . .somewhere busy. Take a bagful of patience with you, as Joe's granny used to say. Joe has no idea what that means, but it seemed soothing then, and it does now. Joe's friend Cuda says you can buy a bagful of patience for fiddy, but Joe thinks that is something else entirely. Now, if Joe were smart, he would take the victim, I mean beagle, to a place he had been many times before, you know Benny's, or National Slop and Ham Steaks, or, you know, something, where he knew the Food Management Service Professionals. They hate to be called Waitresses, Waiters, and, "Miss," particularly when their name is, you know, Steve. Even more so when their name is Bud. Although, if Joe may say so, the last Bud that Joe knew pretty much insisted on being called "miss." But not at work. . . .what were we talking about? Oh, yeah, lunch.

The better you know Bud, the better this'll work out, Joe promises, within reason. If you know Bud TOO well, so much so that you've been calling him Miss when your wife was out of town, you may be meeting with your lawyer much more often, and for entirely different reasons, than we're talking about here. On the other hand, it TOTALLY justifies your eating of more carbs. Like Joe often says, things balance out. Maybe you should sit in Steve's section. Or Lujia's. Yes. Sit with Lujia today. Yes. She is busybusy. Busy is good, as we shall see, heh heh heh (totally unconvincing, Joe knows. . . Joe has no game). Yes!

Tell Lujia that you're testing the beagle. You and she will have played this game many times before, so she will know what to do. And, basically, the game is, "Let's play with the Beagle." As in "Oh my, oh gosh, oh jeez, whatever will I do? I am so so bizzy! Where ever is my head?" and variations on a theme. That's why it's great if you go to a place that's always busy anyway, because it looks totally legit.

Have a whole bunch of things to talk about, and have a legal pad (a LONG FORM legal pad) with MANY totally stupid questions on it, you know, all smudgy, and crunkled and stuff, like you spent OhSo many days trying to develop them. It's also good if you have an "executive team" questionnaire that you "want to go over with you, briefly." Printed on 8 1/2 by 14 paper. Or 11 x 17 if you can get it. Even Better.

(Note: Don't EVER actually use these. These are stupid. If you don't have hiring authority, why are you the MP? Seriously. If you're the MP, and you don't have final hiring authority, quit right now. Either you're in charge or you're not. Here's how to tell. If you don't know, you're not.)

It's VERY helpful to have had a huge double-breakfast before you play this game with the Beagle, and even better if you tell him "don't each much tomorrow morning, because I'm taking you to lunch" because it will make him weak and defenseless, as we've learned from our friends at Gitmo (Back, Evil Bunny!). Just kidding. Joe is PRO torture, I mean, coerced confession, I mean, um. . .Joe means, um. . .encouraged cooperation.

And from here, you know the drill, right? Of COURSE you do. Take forever to get the order taken, take forever to get the food, hopefully, the order is wrong, and then it takes forever to get the FMSP (i.e. SO not-waiter) to get back to you so you can tell it, so it can get it fixed, and reordered, and so on.

And the whole point of all of this nonsense is to find out if the beagle is nice to the help. But it's worth it. And besides, don't even bother trying to lie. Joe KNOWS you've had your eye on Lujia for a while now. Why do you think I sat you in her section? Joe watches out for his MPs. Just keep Bud away from Joe for a while, would ya? He's a little TOO friendly, lately. And Joe isn't so sure about this Steve. Anybody know if this Steve has track lighting? Joe is just asking.

If the lawyer IS nice to the help, or at least understandably frustrated, then it's all to the good. Let Joe explain. Your JoeR is NEVER nice to Food Servers. Your JoeR is nice to Waiters. Joe hates the title Food Server and goes out of his way to torture, I mean, Gitmo, I mean, challenge them, in many divers and interesting ways, as the saying goes. But your JoeR's own very Mama was a Waitress, and Joe, never having quite gotten over the whole Oedipal Complex thang, and being a slow learner, through a process of inverted transference, and a raging case of Herpes [just kidding; Joe was watching Ferris Bueller's Day Off earlier], has managed to convert those positive lovey feelings toward his mama into positive likey feelings toward Waiters.

And that is why JoeR likey Waiters.

Sadly, Food Servers still suck (not in the the good JoeApproved (bing!) way). Foodservers, not as much. Why is a mystery for the ages. Why they suck, Joe means. In the bad way.

But, Joe is ALSO a snob, and a stickler for details, so, even though Joe likey waiters, he also likey good service, and, after all, Joe's own very mama was also a GOOD Waitress, and, after all, a job worth doing, is worth doing on your knees, I mean, well. So, it's okay for the beagle to be a little frustrated. What is NOT okay is for the beagle to be a punk.

It is also okay for the beagle to be a little annoyed when you tell him you took him out for a ride. It is probably not okay for him to beat the hell out of you after you tell him. Funny, yes. Probably not okay. But funny. Yes. Very very funny. Yes.

9. Joe is skipping number eight. No particular reason. Joe just felt like it. Still pissed about the whole branding thing, and taking it out on the system of integers. By the way, shout out to Joe's friend Charlie, who is probably completely surprised to see his name here. Look up, Charlie. Now smile. Charlie has a great smile. If Charlie had some more teeth, Charlie's smile would be even MORE great. Joe dedicates the whole system of integers riff to Charlie who is the only person Joe knows that's actually smart enough to get the joke. When Charlie gets some more teeth, Joe thinks Charlie will get some more, you know. . .MORE! And Charlie will smile even more. Go Charlie!

The link to hiring this lawyer is to decide how this lawyer makes you feel, or, more accurately, ask yourself, how does your GUT feel. Do you like this guy? Do you want to practice with this person? Does this person FEEL like a fit, despite the fact that this "test" is so not licit, ethical, valid, or proper? Ideally, you're making a hiring decision that'll affect a LOT of lives, hopefully for the better, but for a long LONG time in any event. We all know there's no absolutely right decision, but now is the time to listen for what some of the people Joe knows call "the still, small voice." Joe doesn't know what that means, although he has tried to learn, but it sounds really good.

What Joe thinks it means, and what Joe chooses to believe, is that the higher, smarter, wiser, intuitively deeper, most elevated and profound, and evolved part of ourselves is always ready; that is to say, prepared, and willing, to teach us; by which I mean, give us guidance and wisdom; that we've gleaned from all the sources of education, training, and input we've ever been exposed to, when, and if we'll open ourselves up to it.

I wanna be clear, which, for a moment, requires that I be serious. I'm not good at serious; in fact, I hate it. But your job is a big damn deal. Asking someone to join you as a partner is a serious commitment, both for you and them. For you, it's commiting the firm, making a promise that you'll share part of who you are to help them become more than they are, and, in connexion with that, you'll respect the fact that they're willing to join with you and commit their talent and ability, and help the firm become more "tomorrow" than it is today.

But, no matter how big you think the firm's commitment is, it's even MORE of a commitment for a lawyer; it's easy to forget that AFTER the fact. It sounds silly, but it's SO traumatic that, in most cases, it's like what happens after a woman delivers a baby; we tend to forget the intensity of the trauma, and so we minimize it. I can tell you for a fact that, for a partner considering leaving one firm for another, in many cases, it's the most traumatic experience many of them will EVER go through, including Divorce, the dissolution of Partnerships, even the deaths of spouses and/or family members.

So for a Partner considering joining a firm, they have to consider separating themselves from the Corpus of the Firm with whom they've been joined, and joining the corpus of an entirely new, and in many ways different firm. Sure, for some attorneys, maybe a lot of them, hey, no big deal, I can do this all day. . . These guys can probably have a wife, three girlfriends, six mistresses, and, who knows, maybe the Pool Boy, and it won't matter either. But for the stuff that matters, for attorneys for whom this stuff matters, it matters.

And, if it matters to YOU, and it matters to HIM. . .it's a good fit. Hire. Now smile. Yay. You and Charlie. You're like twins, how cool is that?

10. Joe's got nothin'. It's just that everybody does "ten things you MUST know before you get a bikini wax!" Joe wouldn't want you to think you were getting less for your money than you do when you buy Metrosexopolitan Magazine, or whatever. Actually, that's a helluva name for a magazine. Where's that slacker IP lawyer of Joe's? Register that right now! And peel Joe a grape! And schedule Joe a bikini wax!

Damn! Oversharing again!

Love Your Recruiter!



JoeRecruiter

p.s. Bring some TeaTree Lotion. Joe gets a little rashy with the waxing. . . . DAMMIT with the oversharing!

http://joerecruiter.blogspot.com/

Yes!

Exorcise Your Rights-Vote For BOSSY!

Your JoeRecruiter just got Epiphanized, and man, did it hurt. This happens with surprising regularity, so you would think that your JoeRec would be used to it by now, but you would be wrong. On the other hand, you would think that, by now, you would used to being wrong as often as you are, and yet, you are not. See, the Universe, oddly enough, balances itself out.

The topic of today's Sermon is: Vote for BOSSY. Let Joe Explain. But First, go get a cup of coffee. A BIIIIIIG cup of coffee. This is a long sermon. If it were printed on paper, many trees would die. Many trees will die anyway, but that is a topic for another day. Joe will wait. Please, enjoy the festive music . . . . . . . . . . . . .hmm, hmm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . la la la la la. . . . . . . . .sowing the seeds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . shape of my. . . . . . . . . . .back so soon? Oh, thank [diety]! Or not, as you will.

OK. Here we go. Someone, Joe knows not whom, and cannot be bothered to find out, came up with an award, which Joe was NOT invited to participate in, can you believe it? Joe neither. Anyway, Joe's new favourite person EVER, BOSSY, is a FINALIST! YAY!

Her name is BOSSY! She Rocks! So, take your stylish butt (not as Stylish as Joe's, but, hey, who said life is fair? Not Joe.) to http://www.iambossy.com/ and READ, for once in your totally misspent life, then, click on the link and VOTE FOR BOSSY!

For the record, this is not logrolling. Joe isn't even getting paid, or nothin'! Joe knows! How crazy is that! How many exclamation points can you put in a single posting?! What's the record?! Is double punctuation even legal?! The mind reels!

And yes, again, for the record (by the way, does anyone know what "for the record" means? Joe means, outside of a courtroom, which, Joe is very unreliably informed, is what it's saposta mean) Joe has clearly heard the wailing of the masses, and is trying Trying TRYING to get more postings up and out, but, you know, it's not as easy as you might think.

Recruiting is recruiting, but posting is, you know, actual WORK. Joe doesn't have a mouse sitting on his head, or anything, telling him what to write. Joe has to actually do all this stuff by himself. And he has to be conscious, the whole time. Joe doesn't think you appreciate how hard that actually is.

There's a lot more whine left, but Joe has to go. Junior Partner is on the phone. You remember Junior Partner don't you? For you newbies, let Joe introduce. Crowd, Junior Partner. Junior Partner, Crowd. Junior Partner is muy excitato (are those actual words?). After twisting Joe's arm (i.e. dislocating a shoulder or two), she has managed to secure a promise of a week's stay in La Ciudad Las Vegas de La Nevada de La Casinos de La Strip y Los Shows y Los Joe's Dinero en Todo Con Mucho Drinks y Fiestas y No Sueno y Mucho Fatigado para Joe. First Class.

Joe don't wanna talk about it. Joe only wanna say, could somebody, anybody, PLEASE, Joe's begging you, storm out of the Partner's meeting, and say "I'm LEAVING!!" Pretty, Pretty Please?

Love Your Recruiter!



JoeRecruiter

p.s. Joe without a manicure is an ugly, UGLY picture. . .Joe's just saying.

http://joerecruiter.blogspot.com/

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