'Dealing with Difficult Situations'. Or not.

He's a lot cuter than my boss.........

Today I was party to a training session with an external trainer on 'Dealing with difficult situations'. I thought it was a particularly good session actually. Unlike the generic delivery of standard role play scenarios and regurgitation of psychobabble that training on similar topics tends consist of, this session was tailored, insightful and useful to those who attended. I am not really writing about the session itself but something that was shared during it.

I found out that two of the most senior partners cannot stand each other. Further more, their 'issue' has meant they sit on opposite sides of the building despite being part of the same team.

I was shocked! I have always thought it odd that they were so far apart, I just assumed it was something to do with the senior management team spreading out amongst the firm. As a result the rest of their team is spread out in little hot spots with support staff and other specialist teams in between. Their secretary is never at her desk as she is always running between one end of the office to the other and it is rare to see a team discussion anywhere other than in a formal meeting. One thing I have learnt as a trainee is that being near to a team means you can learn and contribute from each other. In a knowledge based, fast moving discipline such as law this interaction is crucial.

Call me naive but I can't understand how two grown up professional people could let a personal difference go so far to the point that it could affect their team's performance. These people are supposed to be not only heads of departments but are directly involved in running the Firm. Feuds are for your personal life, if you are that stubborn, it has no place in the work place.

Of course I am assuming it is a personal difference. There is a possibility it is a work problem; everyone has that person in the office they think can't do their job. If that person is in your team it makes it more difficult. I can't imagine what the response would be to a request to sit at the other end of the office to avoid an annoying colleague. Your desk certainly wouldn't go anywhere, although you might.

What concerns me is the acceptance of the segregation. It is such an institutionalised position that it seems only those who work or have worked within the team know about it, although it isn't hidden. The rest of their team, and probably the Firm, have simply learnt to work around them until now it is as if it is normal. The work might be getting done, I just can't shake the idea that it could be done better if the team was close enough to talk to each other!

I wish there was a big law firm mother figure who could come and clunk their heads together. A childish issue needs a childish solution. As is I guess I shall just have to learn the lesson for them.

My name is TS, Miss TS.



I wear something similar under my suit!



Following Ashley Connick's post today about anonymous blawging I thought I would explain my reasons for not blogging as the Real Me (I am sorry to disappoint, those legs aren't mine. I do have a pair of shoes remarkably similar though!)



With a purely vain starting note, my professional picture is AWFUL. Fuji knows how the photographer got the job because he clearly knows nothing about angles, lighting or handling a camera. Worst of all, it looks like I have teeth the same shade as cheesy puffs. I do not have orange teeth. Obviously I wouldn't use such a terrible photo on twitter but I do have to use it on my Linked in account (work enforced) and the smaller the number of people who see it before I can get it redone the better. I know that isn't the point of Linked in but it really is That Bad.



I have to say that my secret identity (apart from making me a little like a spy - 00TS? or a ninja.........) isn't because I am shy, like Mr Bizzle. I also don't feel the need to get changed in telephone boxes necessitating an alter ego to explain public indecency.  My other reasons revolves around protection and censorship. I have to say that my Firm is a little behind in the social media world. While we do have a Social Media Strategy, it is more an acknowledgement it exists rather than an approach to its use. At a recent trainee meeting (trainees plus HR) they suggested creating a Firm facebook page. I raised the possibility of a Firm Trainee twitter account and discovered I was the only twitterer. Needless to say I thought it was probably a little advanced to discuss blogging at any length...

This being the case I don't think the Firm is ready for a trainee who blogs. I'm not confident they would understand my reasons or allow me to continue uncensored, if I was allowed at all. The thought that if I was discovered the Firm might use my blog as free advertising chills me but I cannot shrug off the feeling that they would try to take advantage. Neither do I want to be the 'tweeting trainee' but undoubtedly that is what I would become!

There is the argument for being able to say something I wouldn't say in front of my supervisor. I want to be able to write without fear of getting caught with my laptop in my mouth. This isn't the overarching reason for me hiding behind a fabulous pair of shoes but is an added bonus.

The real reason I have kept myself to myself, as it were, is the lack of presence of the Firm within the social media world. As far as I know I am the only twegal in the office! I know my readership isn't huge and I am not in any way saying that my little blog would have an effect, detrimental or other wise. It is more I would not want anyone to form an opinion of the Firm based on what I say (the, although small, outcry following my post on ghostwriting is case in point) and however unlikely this may be it is an eventuality that. if it were possible, would affect my writing.

Put simply, I don't want to be censored, sub consciously or otherwise. Being anonymous is the way I have decided to approach this. I am far too prone to ranting to rely on my blog being positive and I can't control who may read what I post. If I didn't want anyone to see it I'd write a diary, complete with lock and key!
So, until I am confident that my Firm are blog friendly (and until I have a safe NQ position....) I will hide behind my shoes.

There is the reverse downside to being anonymous. While I can't be found for the wrong reasons I also cannot be found for the right ones. If someone is particularly impressed with my writing or tweeting (you never know!) I can't personally take the glory, or the work if that was being offered. I am not writing to promote myself so this is not an problem at the moment. Ask me again when I have been offered something and I might just tell you my name.......

Trainee solicitor; complimentary ghostwriter

I know the feeling Ewan

There is a marketing drive in my Firm to get more website hits and general Internet interest for the teams. What this boils down to is writing more articles, newsletters and updates to publish online, the idea being that the more buzz words included in these articles means more search engine hits. (a concept not lost on bloggers........ LAW, Training Contract, Justin Bieber.... ahem)

However, the big important lawyers with the experience and knowledge to comment legitimately on topical issues certainly don't have the time to waste on marketing that doesn't involve expenses or drink receptions. The mid level lawyers have to get their chargeable hours down to meet targets so it is unlikely they have the time to spend on non-chargeable article writing. So the article writing duties trickle down through the ranks until they pool at the feet of the trainee.

And so through this process I have been signed up to write the Insolvency monthly articles and the newsletter and the update bulletin for the Education sector. As well as all the other work and extra duties (like canape serving!) that trainees are expected to do I have to keep up to speed with the market place, legal opinion and the law on both these areas, write short 'pithy' (the sector head used this word 6 times when explaining the education newsletter) articles on hot topics and provide easily digestible updates on developments over the last month.

I understand this is an important role for a trainee and researching topics will help develop my knowledge of the sector and department. I am also happy with the actual writing of the articles - I enjoy writing and being 'pithy' comes naturally to me (case in point!). It will allow me to demonstrate my grasp of the law and commercial awareness. But, after reviewing hundreds of alert results and websites, hours of research and energy spent being witty, I won't personally have anything to show for it. Trainees are not given credit!

I can see the reason behind this; who wants to hear what a trainee has to say? Why does the opinion of someone who has only been in the law for 6 months matter? For marketing purposes my point of view counts for very little when compared with the head of the department. However, when I have spent time writing something it grates to see someone else get the glory. As an example, an article on an insolvency topic was recently published online in the name of my supervisor but written by me. He has also included a link on his Linked in profile and it has been included in our business round up. So not only is my supervisor taking the credit for my amazing writing skills but he is using them to promote himself personally.  

I could write an equivalent article for my blog using the research but I think it would become a little obvious when an articles on the same topic are repeatedly published by my Firm. I value my anonymity too much for that and besides, I might get caught! I guess I don't have much of an option but to begrudgingly write brilliant articles and let my superiors have them. Maybe I can use all my experience to diversify into legal journalism - Miss TS, editor does have a certain ring to it......

Russian Heavies and A Window Seat: Day 1 in Insolvency

So today was my first day as an Insolvency trainee. I spent most of the day reading in and organising myself  but I have learnt a few things already:

1. Being one extra floor up is a lot harder than just a flight of stairs - everything is that much further away. A trip to the post room now has to be planned rather than just making a quick dash down the stairs. I bumped into so many people walking through the building that it took half an hour!



My fake laugh model - too much?



2. A window seat IS more prestigious. I thought that it was some office politic nonsense that fee earners had got caught up in - the battle for a window seat. But now I am sat in one I can totally see the appeal! Plus I get to watch the circuit class lunge across the car park - 2 o'clock entertainment to break up the day.

3. The business partners like to make terrible jokes and expect the subordinates to laugh. As an example: someone brought back sweets from France today. Head of Business "I like bon bons. And these sweets are pretty good too! haw haw" *looks around to check everyone a) got it and b) is laughing* I'm going to have to practice my fake laugh to survive in this department

4. You don't leave at 5.30 in business. In property I once stayed until 6 and got told to go home. Tonight I didn't even realise it was 6 as the department was still buzzing. Guess I'm in for some late(r) nights!!!!

5. I don't drink tea if no one makes it for me (sorry Mr Bizzle I don't run on coffee). I thought I was addicted but turns out without a cup magically appearing on my desk (courtesy of some very efficient and equally caffeine addicted secretaries) I don't miss it......

I didn't learn a lot about insolvency, I'm sure that will come with time. Except, and I thought this was fairly obvious,  that hiring Russian heavies to forfeit a lease is not a good idea.........

Specialist Trainees: a contradiction?

A Trainees innovative marketing idea.......?

Today the firm's trainees got allocated to sectors. The aim is to give us a 'consistant focal point for marketing and business development throughout our training and beyond'. Something to get really passionate about. I have a sneaky suspicion the sectors need some donkeys to do the grunt work - trainees step up.

Most commercial law firms have sectors - these are multi departmental teams designed to work for a particular type of client. In London they sound more like degree subjects than client groups; life sciences or recreational facilities. Down in the West Country we have such wonders as agriculture and rural affairs and care homes. The idea is that the expertise and marketing strategies of these target areas can be unified across the firm to give better service but also get more clients. Its easier for potential clients to identify with a category they may fit into rather than trying to picture which of the services a firm offices they might need.

Its a good idea and it works well. It allows lawyers to build up a specialism without neglecting their more general practice. It is easier to cross sell services for those in the sector and those outside - in a firm like mine where this is particularly poor, every little helps! Sector specific targeting gives a focus to marketing. And it gives the marketing teams an opportunity to put together little leaflets with more interesting pictures than the usual 'man in suit looking friendly but serious'.

What I am unsure about is the trainees' role in all this. Do we have enough experience after 6 months to be able to choose an area we are passionate about? Equally, do we have enough experience to be able to contribute anything other than manpower to what is essentially a specialism? There is similar discontent among the sector heads; they are concerned that with the trainees seat hopping, their involvement will be inconsistent and unreliable.

I can see the principle behind it and the opportunity to get involved in cross-firm initiatives is worthwhile for any trainee. I am glad we haven't been pigeon holed into sectors either - we were given a choice (not much of one given the sectors in my Firm, but choice none the less).

I do think the practice is going to fall short of the vision however. The impression from Head of Marketing (a defected lawyer no less - gone to the dark side she has) was that each sector 'needed' a trainee. Yes, needed. That isn't the word used for opportunities but a word used with intent. Recruiting trainees with mailshot stuffing and target cold calling in mind, for example. The firm has just launched a publications service for the sector groups which needs populating with articles and updates. No guesses for who is going to be lumbered with the research and no extra points for who is unlikely to get the end credit.

I would be interested to know if other firms have sector trainees or similar. In my mind it is too early in my career to choose a specialism. I may qualify into an area that has no relevance to my new sector - education. I doubt my next seat is going to have a lot of relevance for example. I am also not looking forward to explaining to my supervisor when I have urgent sector work that his will have to wait. Apparently this is a battle fought for anyone in a sector not directly linked to their department: Tourism in Commercial Property for example.

All in all I think a need for some lackeys to do the work no one else has the time for has pushed our trainees into specialist areas too soon.

One thing from the meeting I did find amusing - the sectors have been set up with twitter accounts. May be tweeting under another guise very soon!

The Handover: an update

After Monday's post, a virtuous and wise Victoria Moffat lead me away from competitive trickery and lead me to formulate A Cunning Plan.

This was to write the best handover notes and use them to update the fee earners responsible for the files. A twofold benefit for me: (1) Successor Trainee will have good notes to work from and (2) I will get brownie points for updating my fee earners. Its win win, right?

Wrong

I forgot to take into consideration the fee earner's in my department aren't particularly forward thinking. Apart from my supervisor, none of the other fee-earners had positive reactions. Most of them just wanted to know if there was anything pressing and although I had highlighted this at the top of each note, they refused to read them. Others had forgotten that I had the files, despite checking my outgoing correspondence on said files for the last 6 months so thought I was cheekily reminding them! So much for the extra brownie points.......

By far my favourite reaction was the following, from a grumpy fee earner:

Grumpy Lawyer: "Miss TS, what is this?"

Miss TS: "It's an update on your file that I am going to handover to the your new trainee"

Grumpy Lawyer: "Did I ask you to do this?"

Miss TS: "No, but I thought it would be a good idea for you to be up to date with what I have been doing"

Grumpy Lawyer: "Its very in depth. Is is on the file?"

Miss TS: "Not yet, I wanted you to read it first."

Grumpy Lawyer: "Don't bother. This new trainee has got to learn on his own without any help from you. You can't be his wet nurse"

Miss TS: "-"

Grumpy Lawyer: *walks off muttering* "What a waste of time........."

Charming. Oh well, I tried!!!