Well, things are finally starting to move forward on the personal brand quest front. I was delighted to speak with Legal Week recently in relation to a peice which they're writing on Tweeting Lawyers (I'll link to the piece once t goes live); I have an interview lined up for late September with 22Twts (a real time Twitter interview which asks 22 questions of tweeting lawyers, and I have the honour of being their first interview of an in-house lawyer), and finally I have myself a press deadline (scary) as I've been asked to provide an opinion piece for the Solicitors Journal on the recent Akzo Nobel case decison on privilege and the in-house lawyer.
It's lawyering, but not as we know it.
Thursday, 16 September 2010
Thursday, 9 September 2010
The Hub's got the Goods
One of the more interesting feeds in my daily RSS stream today pointed me in the direction of the OFT's website. The OFT website is one of the Government websites which I do tend to frequent more than others as so much of the OFT's work affects business (what with its myriad of Codes of Conduct, protection and enforcement work and competition regulation), but also business can affect the OFT's work as well (such as by contributing to their industry focussed consultations).
The reason for my visit to the website today though was to take a look at its online Hub launched to help retailers comply with the Sale of Goods Act (SGA). Like most legislation, the SGA isn't the most riveting of reads, as you can see here:
But the good old Hub has made it a much more user-friendly read, thus:
The Hub includes an at a glance flowchart, download area, case studies and even a quick quiz should the mood take you!
One of the many tasks of the in-house lawyer is to simplify legal concepts and make them less of an obstacle for business; the Hub is a terrific example of how lawyers can use technology creatively to achieve that goal.
The reason for my visit to the website today though was to take a look at its online Hub launched to help retailers comply with the Sale of Goods Act (SGA). Like most legislation, the SGA isn't the most riveting of reads, as you can see here:
But the good old Hub has made it a much more user-friendly read, thus:
The Hub includes an at a glance flowchart, download area, case studies and even a quick quiz should the mood take you!
One of the many tasks of the in-house lawyer is to simplify legal concepts and make them less of an obstacle for business; the Hub is a terrific example of how lawyers can use technology creatively to achieve that goal.
Wednesday, 11 August 2010
5 Reasons for In-House Counsel to use Linked In
In the style of the popular 5 Reasons for In-house Counsel to use Twitter, and having noticed that I'm spending more time using Linked In lately, it seemed only right and proper to set out my 5 reasons for in-house counsel to use Linked In:
1. In Branded I discussed the benefits to all lawyers of creating a personal brand online. Linked In is a credible, professional online network which is designed to provide you with the the tools to establish your online professional persona quickly and simply on a canvas which Twitter and, say, Facebook can't provide:
3. Linked In groups offer you a members-only style form for you to connect with other in-house professionals. To get you started, here are a selection of Linked In groups focussed on in-house lawyers:
4. Linked In groups provide you with the opportunity to, not only connect with other in-house counsel, but to also learn from, join in and create discussions on your group's specialist subject area. Members of groups share information resources, survey data and pose questions on topics of interest, and if you choose to subscribe to your group's email update (on a daily or weekly basis) all of that valuable information and discussion-based material can be delivered direct to your in-box.
5. Lawyers are one of the professions which are traditionally dragged into technology. My real-life contacts from law firms are under-represented on Linked In and, those law firm contacts who are there, have the least active profiles. As in-house counsel, I like to think we're more connected with the way the rest of business uses technology and we should prove to the professional community that lawyers can have a social (networking) life too!
And, if you're a lawyer who does embrace technology, Linked In is one of the venues where you'll come across other tech-savvy lawyers.
I'll see you on Linked In then: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/melaniejhatton
1. In Branded I discussed the benefits to all lawyers of creating a personal brand online. Linked In is a credible, professional online network which is designed to provide you with the the tools to establish your online professional persona quickly and simply on a canvas which Twitter and, say, Facebook can't provide:
- Your Linked In profile page acts as an online CV
- The profiles of those who you are connected with are stored in an easily-searchable Contacts list
- Links to your website, blog and Twitter account can be easily incorporated into your profile page to showcase your wider online presence
- Status updates, activity timelines, group links and recommendations showcase your business impact
3. Linked In groups offer you a members-only style form for you to connect with other in-house professionals. To get you started, here are a selection of Linked In groups focussed on in-house lawyers:
- In House Legal
- Legal Week: In-house lawyers group
- The Lawyer: In-house Hub
- Law Department Management
4. Linked In groups provide you with the opportunity to, not only connect with other in-house counsel, but to also learn from, join in and create discussions on your group's specialist subject area. Members of groups share information resources, survey data and pose questions on topics of interest, and if you choose to subscribe to your group's email update (on a daily or weekly basis) all of that valuable information and discussion-based material can be delivered direct to your in-box.
5. Lawyers are one of the professions which are traditionally dragged into technology. My real-life contacts from law firms are under-represented on Linked In and, those law firm contacts who are there, have the least active profiles. As in-house counsel, I like to think we're more connected with the way the rest of business uses technology and we should prove to the professional community that lawyers can have a social (networking) life too!
And, if you're a lawyer who does embrace technology, Linked In is one of the venues where you'll come across other tech-savvy lawyers.
I'll see you on Linked In then: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/melaniejhatton
Thursday, 29 July 2010
Pick n' Mix
A corporate lawyer in private practice asked me recently, "What's it like to have just the one client then?"
"Not quite as simple as having just the one specialism," I replied. Because, when it comes to being an in-house lawyer, life is like a box of chocolates pick n' mix.
As a sole in-house counsel, I don't have the luxury of a specialism. My employer relies on me to know just the right amount of law about any event which happens to affect it that day of the week (and sometimes not necessarily the "right amount of law" just "the right amount of knowledge generally"). So, that could be a dose of contractual drafting on a Monday, a dip into a property lease on a Tuesday, approving the HR policies on a Wednesday, a dose of contract drafting on a Thursday and a dabble in collecting debt on a Friday*. Although more often than not, its all of those things and then some on a Monday and the rest of the week continues in a consistently random manner.
*I always leave anything litigious to a Friday, I'm a non-contentious lawyer and, to me, opposing counsel seem much more inclined to strike a deal with less antagonism on a Friday than any other day of the week. This just happens to be my observation of the world of litigation, any litigators out there who concur or disagree can drop me a line. On a Friday please.
Anyway, the point is an in-house lawyer has to be prepared to deal with any type of issue which drops onto his or her desk and be able to choose the correct legal tool to conjure the solution required. We just need to get things done.
I've acclimatised to being a general commercial lawyer through a combination of in-house roles in different industry sectors and also a good grounding in the Commercial teams of a couple of private practice firms. I recall being a trainee in the Commercial team of a law firm, and on my first day in the seat I asked the outgoing trainee what type of work I could expect to do in the team, he replied "Well, if it doesn't fall into Corporate, Property or Litigation, you'll be doing it".
However, I think there's much more discipline to being a general commercial lawyer than that rather glib welcome to the Commercial team suggests, and Richard Russeth, author of the blog The Last Generalist, agrees. Richard claims that the legal generalist is the new specialist. In his post More Sheriff Taylor Less Wyatt Earp, "Not a “jack of all trades, master of none” but a master of the breadth, height and depth of the law, its reason and its wisdom. She sees the forest. She sees the trees. She sees all the little pieces of the deal/business/environment, the mosaic they create, and, as a result, what needs to be done, the specialists needed, the knowledge to be tapped. She brings ethics, finesse and wisdom to her counsel. She is a counselor at law."
Liquorice allsorts anyone?
Branded Part 3: Roll up for the Round up!
2010 marks the beginning of the The UK Blawg Round Up, the UK Lawyers’ Blog of Blawgs. Its mission: to highlight the UK legal blogging scene and the players in it.
UK blogging lawyers are playing catch-up to our counterparts in the US, where the mighty Blawg Review is published weekly. At present, the UK Blawg Round Up is published quarterly, and there have been 3 editions to date:
• Its Not Blawg Review
• New Beginnings
• Midsummer Madness
I’m thrilled to announce that the 4th edition of the UK Blawg Roundup will be hosted by me. Due out 31 October, the theme will be, unsurprisingly, a Halloween Hoot!
If you’re a lawyer on the UK blogging scene, please submit your blog post for me to review via the Blog Carnival by 17 October. I'm looking forward to reading all submissions and finding out more about you all.
The UK legal blogging (or blawging) is in its infancy and there really is no better time for home-grown legal bloggers to make their mark and establish a personal brand. So jump on board and get involved!.
UK blogging lawyers are playing catch-up to our counterparts in the US, where the mighty Blawg Review is published weekly. At present, the UK Blawg Round Up is published quarterly, and there have been 3 editions to date:
• Its Not Blawg Review
• New Beginnings
• Midsummer Madness
I’m thrilled to announce that the 4th edition of the UK Blawg Roundup will be hosted by me. Due out 31 October, the theme will be, unsurprisingly, a Halloween Hoot!
If you’re a lawyer on the UK blogging scene, please submit your blog post for me to review via the Blog Carnival by 17 October. I'm looking forward to reading all submissions and finding out more about you all.
The UK legal blogging (or blawging) is in its infancy and there really is no better time for home-grown legal bloggers to make their mark and establish a personal brand. So jump on board and get involved!.
Tuesday, 20 July 2010
Legal Department v. Sales Department: Round 1!
In my post, The Essential Tool-Kit for the In-house Lawyer, one of the contributors of an idea for an item to include in the kit mentioned the essential requirement of "an effigy of a sales manager to stick pins in".
Justified?
In each in-house legal position I've held there has been, without fail, a friction between the Legal team and the Sales & Marketing team. The reason? Our teams respective purposes within the company are diametrically opposed.
The job of Sales & Marketing:- to sell the company's products and services to as many customers as possible. This more often that not entails a burning desire on the part of the Sales & Marketing team to raise the expectations of the customer, consequently making the customer believe that the product or service is a whole lot more than it likely is, and at a great price to boot.
And the job of the Legal team:- to manage expectations, to manage risk. To ensure that the customer knows exactly what they're buying, and at exactly what price too.
It's a battlefield at the best of times; and I pity any fresh-faced law graduate starting from the top of the ivory tower, when placed in front of an aggressive and experienced Sales Director at month-end intent on reaching his target. However, in my experience I've learned that there's no reason that the friction can't be a healthy friction.
The Defence?
The best Sales Director I've worked alongside was at a previous role I held in the package travel industry. A highly-competitive industry, low margins, a pile 'em high sell 'em cheap mentality, and heaving with regulation particularly advertising regulation. I say "worked alongside" this Sales Director because that's Rule 1 of working in-house: no matter which department of the company you're in, you're all on the same team.
This Sales Director knew his product and his target market inside out, but he also knew the law inside out too. Which meant he tested me. Every product, every promotion, every advertisement was pushed to the limits of what was legally acceptable. It became apparent to me very quickly that it wasn't enough to simply say "you can't say that in the ad, its against such and such regulation": he knew the regulations word for word, he knew what the regulations did and didn't say, he knew every code of conduct on the subject, every discussion which led to the code of conduct being formulated, and every case bought to the attention of the ASA. This guy knew his stuff! Which meant that I needed to know it better and more thoroughly than he did to stand my ground when it mattered most. It was a great lesson in law and, more importantly, its practical application.
Opposing counsel?
They're not all like that and most dis-regard the law, or alternatively make up their own version of it. But keep in mind Rule 1, and your battleground will become a more workable place to be.
Justified?
In each in-house legal position I've held there has been, without fail, a friction between the Legal team and the Sales & Marketing team. The reason? Our teams respective purposes within the company are diametrically opposed.
The job of Sales & Marketing:- to sell the company's products and services to as many customers as possible. This more often that not entails a burning desire on the part of the Sales & Marketing team to raise the expectations of the customer, consequently making the customer believe that the product or service is a whole lot more than it likely is, and at a great price to boot.
And the job of the Legal team:- to manage expectations, to manage risk. To ensure that the customer knows exactly what they're buying, and at exactly what price too.
It's a battlefield at the best of times; and I pity any fresh-faced law graduate starting from the top of the ivory tower, when placed in front of an aggressive and experienced Sales Director at month-end intent on reaching his target. However, in my experience I've learned that there's no reason that the friction can't be a healthy friction.
The Defence?
The best Sales Director I've worked alongside was at a previous role I held in the package travel industry. A highly-competitive industry, low margins, a pile 'em high sell 'em cheap mentality, and heaving with regulation particularly advertising regulation. I say "worked alongside" this Sales Director because that's Rule 1 of working in-house: no matter which department of the company you're in, you're all on the same team.
This Sales Director knew his product and his target market inside out, but he also knew the law inside out too. Which meant he tested me. Every product, every promotion, every advertisement was pushed to the limits of what was legally acceptable. It became apparent to me very quickly that it wasn't enough to simply say "you can't say that in the ad, its against such and such regulation": he knew the regulations word for word, he knew what the regulations did and didn't say, he knew every code of conduct on the subject, every discussion which led to the code of conduct being formulated, and every case bought to the attention of the ASA. This guy knew his stuff! Which meant that I needed to know it better and more thoroughly than he did to stand my ground when it mattered most. It was a great lesson in law and, more importantly, its practical application.
Opposing counsel?
They're not all like that and most dis-regard the law, or alternatively make up their own version of it. But keep in mind Rule 1, and your battleground will become a more workable place to be.
Sunday, 27 June 2010
Law Donut
I mentioned in Branded Part 2: Donuts and Carnivals, that I was pleased to be a contributor to the Law Donut blog.
My first post for that blog, Avoid April Showers, was a timely reminder for employers to regularly review their employment policies and contracts. My most recent post for that blog, Licensed to thrill?, is another reminder for employers, but this time with reference to the different licences which are required in a workplace which plays music, television or radio whether for the benefit of its staff or customers.
There are more regular contributors to the Law Donut than me, and they successfully make the Law Donut an excellent source of know-how and discussion on the nitty-gritty of what law and regulation actually means for employers and small businesses.
My first post for that blog, Avoid April Showers, was a timely reminder for employers to regularly review their employment policies and contracts. My most recent post for that blog, Licensed to thrill?, is another reminder for employers, but this time with reference to the different licences which are required in a workplace which plays music, television or radio whether for the benefit of its staff or customers.
There are more regular contributors to the Law Donut than me, and they successfully make the Law Donut an excellent source of know-how and discussion on the nitty-gritty of what law and regulation actually means for employers and small businesses.
Thursday, 10 June 2010
The Essential Tool-Kit for the In-House Lawyer
Throughout my experience as an in-house lawyer, I've had a requirement for the following 3 items over and above all else:
- A magic wand (to right wrongs and generally make things not the way they actually are)
- A crystal ball (to predict the future of course)
- A healthy stash of contracts that stretch to 2 sides of paper only (I don't know why, but when it comes to contracts, non-lawyers require them to be on 2 sides of paper only. Its a mystical quality which seems to keep everyone warm, comfortable and happy about any situation with a potential legal repercussion. I'm happy to oblige.)
Today on Twitter, I decided to ask my fellow tweeting in-house lawyers what they considered to be the essential items they needed to get through a day in the life of an in-house lawyer. I concurred with all of their replies, and so I'm now pleased to reveal the Official Essential Tool-Kit for the In-House Lawyer:
- The three items mentioned above
- A time machine (presumably for situations where the magic wand and crystal ball fail to function as required)
- A pair of reality glasses to loan out to people as and when needed (so in reality, a huge stash of reality glasses)
- A "10 minute" gun to shoot someone and they die for 10 minutes (I'm thinking @gamingcounsel was having a particularly bad day when he suggested this item, and I'm sure he doesn't really mean to shoot any of his co-workers)
- An effigy of a sales manager to stick pins in (heck, we in-house lawyers are displaying a fair bit of pent up rage aren't we? Although I could write several blog posts on the...hmmmm....challenges which arise between in-house legal and sales. Yes we're all on the same "company team" but essentially our functions are diametrically opposed and always will be)
- Two large red stamps (a) APPROVED and (b) DENIED (interesting this one, anything I "deny" tends to land on my desk the next day in disguise if I'm lucky, if I'm unlucky, "denied" activities tend to happen anyway under the cover of darkness)
- A repeat button (must be hard wearing)
There were some behavioural and physical traits which were suggested as essential also:
- The patience of a saint
- A sense of humour
- Open eyes and ears (I took this to mean alertness. Pro-plus and caffeine can assist with this)
- 2 feet and 2 hands (although it did strike me that if we were going to get this particular about the tool-kit, an extra pair of hands and feet and some "go faster" stripes are most definitely required)
Some of the more sensible suggestions also hit a chord, and there was a consistent message that in-house lawyers need:
- A quiet office (a haven, particularly for the in-house lawyer in an open-plan space shared primarily with non-lawyers who don't always share the same requirement for quiet review of papers or the keeping of matters confidential)
- A decent PC and a full complement of software and internet access
- Twitter!
- The internet (an absolute essential for lawyers operating without access to the informational resource of a traditional law firm library and professional support lawyer team)
- An accurate, complete and up to date contracts register recording all commercial agreements in the company (plus a paralegal to help run it)
- Trained co-workers with access to self-help guidance (working on the theory that a stitch in time saves nine)
- Black's Law Dictionary (I don't know what this is but mention of it it caused quite a stir amongst tweeters on the other side of the Atlantic)
Interestingly, no in-house lawyer mentioned either of the following:
- External counsel
- iPads (the one teccy item which is generating a huge amount of road-testing, blogging and commenting on by tech-savvy lawyers the world over at the moment)
Thank you to all of my fellow tweeting lawyers who took the time to share their thoughts with me today on this subject: @richard_russeth @philcylaw @jcasalmir @gamingcounsel @jamesbarnesesq @legalbizzle @jds @TM_Association @AlexandraHa @TMT_Lawyer
I'd love to hear from you if you have any experiences with items in the Essential Tool-Kit listed above or any other items to add to it.
Wednesday, 2 June 2010
Winner: Follow up on my Shameless Plug Post
It never rains, but it pours; two blog posts in one night after the drought that was May.
So, following up on my Shameless Plug & Follow Up post where I asked you all to click on the link to my blog post for Latitude in the hope that if it was the post with the most hits on the Latitude blog for that month then I would win the prize for the monthly blogging competition......drum roll.......well thank you all very much indeed, I won! Even better, an earlier blog post which I'd penned for Latitude and which I'd cunningly linked to in the first (I don't work for a digital marketing agency for nothing) came second. I won again!
I have donated my winnings from the competition to Save the Children.
So, following up on my Shameless Plug & Follow Up post where I asked you all to click on the link to my blog post for Latitude in the hope that if it was the post with the most hits on the Latitude blog for that month then I would win the prize for the monthly blogging competition......drum roll.......well thank you all very much indeed, I won! Even better, an earlier blog post which I'd penned for Latitude and which I'd cunningly linked to in the first (I don't work for a digital marketing agency for nothing) came second. I won again!
I have donated my winnings from the competition to Save the Children.
I'm a Specialist Plant
I recently realised that I've not blogged a blog post throughout the whole of May. However, I do have a perfectly good scientific explanation for this.
I'm a specialist plant.
At least, my "preferred roles" are that of a specialist (law) and a plant (a creative ideas person). More particularly, my "least preferred role" is that of a completer-finisher (..er...there's no easy way to say this, basically I prefer other people to sort out the detail, and I'll get on with the bigger picture). This is unusual for a lawyer, most of us are archetypal completer-finishers (interested in painstaking detail). Not me apparently.
In other words, I had an idea about how I could develop my specialism of law....this blog, and then during May (presumably while I had other ideas brewing) I must have assumed that someone else in Team Melanie would get on with the detail of the blog for me. No such luck!
Well, at least this is the explanation according to an analysis of my typical behaviours in a Belbin Team Role Profile. For those of you who aren't familiar with Belbin, he was a Dr who, (not Dr Who, but a Dr who) with a team of researchers in the 1970's, set about observing and recording team behaviours, with a view to finding out why some teams worked effectively and some didn't (assuming a controlled set of resources). The research identified 9 Team-Role behaviours, and through an incredibly simple set of psychometric questions identifies an individual's preferred, manageable and least-preferred team toles. To have a preference for or against a role is not wrong per se, and the theory does suggest "allowable weaknesses" for each role (for example the conscientious completer-finisher might be reluctant to delegate), but on the flip side, it also suggests weaknesses which if allowed to get out of hand would not be beneficial for the overall team good.
Like DISC (see my earlier post Disc World) Belbin theory is another tool which allows you to understand your own behaviour and those of others in your team. It also helps team managers to not just build a team made up of a perfectly balanced set of 9 Team Role types, but identify where the potential gaps of behaviour in their team lie and to plan around that accordingly.
I was introduced to Belbin Team Role Theory by the very friendly and helpful Urquhart Partnership, or for more information you can go direct to http://www.belbin.com/.
I'm a specialist plant.
At least, my "preferred roles" are that of a specialist (law) and a plant (a creative ideas person). More particularly, my "least preferred role" is that of a completer-finisher (..er...there's no easy way to say this, basically I prefer other people to sort out the detail, and I'll get on with the bigger picture). This is unusual for a lawyer, most of us are archetypal completer-finishers (interested in painstaking detail). Not me apparently.
In other words, I had an idea about how I could develop my specialism of law....this blog, and then during May (presumably while I had other ideas brewing) I must have assumed that someone else in Team Melanie would get on with the detail of the blog for me. No such luck!
Well, at least this is the explanation according to an analysis of my typical behaviours in a Belbin Team Role Profile. For those of you who aren't familiar with Belbin, he was a Dr who, (not Dr Who, but a Dr who) with a team of researchers in the 1970's, set about observing and recording team behaviours, with a view to finding out why some teams worked effectively and some didn't (assuming a controlled set of resources). The research identified 9 Team-Role behaviours, and through an incredibly simple set of psychometric questions identifies an individual's preferred, manageable and least-preferred team toles. To have a preference for or against a role is not wrong per se, and the theory does suggest "allowable weaknesses" for each role (for example the conscientious completer-finisher might be reluctant to delegate), but on the flip side, it also suggests weaknesses which if allowed to get out of hand would not be beneficial for the overall team good.
Like DISC (see my earlier post Disc World) Belbin theory is another tool which allows you to understand your own behaviour and those of others in your team. It also helps team managers to not just build a team made up of a perfectly balanced set of 9 Team Role types, but identify where the potential gaps of behaviour in their team lie and to plan around that accordingly.
I was introduced to Belbin Team Role Theory by the very friendly and helpful Urquhart Partnership, or for more information you can go direct to http://www.belbin.com/.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)