Law And More

"The Hero's Farewell" - From Jack Welch to David Lat

Power is heady.

The misfit Puritans made business one of the most powerful institutions in the new land. Actually it became the nation's shadow religion.

The economy they put together from scratch become the world's top dog. 

So, from the get-go, the leaders in business - often called "chief executive officers" - found it difficult to let go of that power when the job ended.

They still do.

Aging media tycoon Rupert Murdoch and investment genius Warren Buffett are not putting out there any signs of leaving.

Also, former head of legal media site Abovethelaw - David Lat - still has at least one foot in that sandbox. Maybe more.

Lat is now an employee at legal executive search firm Lateral Link.  The title is "managing director" but that's not being the number-one any more. 

The transition from number-one to an employee, by its very nature, represents a tricky crossroads.  Here is my analysis of some of that. 

"The Hero's Farewell, by management expert Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, captures that struggle. If former leaders don't navigate the shift just right, the implications are grim.

Their overall career could blow up.

More to the point, the business could flounder.

One has to wonder if Jack Welch had inflicted that darkness on himself and GE. He seemed to be unable to let go. GE has been in severe distress. The legacy of both is in play.

Constituencies with interests invested in those businesses in which the number-one departs might create a five-year rule.

That is, even though the former leaders might own stock (and a lot of it) they are banned from all official input for 60 months.

That includes no seat on the board.

Speaking to the media about the company is forbidden.

And, no organizing a stockholder movement to regain power.

As the platitude screams: We live in interesting times. How former business leaders manage their farewell is at the top of the list of fascinations. 

Full Disclosure: Recently I had a negative experience with Lateral Link.

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

CA Bar Exam Feburary Results - The Good News Should Actually Be Bad News

For the February 2019 bar exam, there was a 4.1 percentage uptick in the pass rate versus scores in February 2018.

However, the actual percent of those passing was 31.4. That represents the second lowest in 35 years.

Simultaneously, American Bar Association has adopted a new standard regarding bar passage. The change is this: Alumni of law schools will have to pass the bar within two years of graduation in order for the law school to maintain its accreditation. The earlier standard had been five years.

It is interesting to note that Whittier law school, with a 57 percent pass rate in 2016, had already decided to close. But most law schools in CA could meet the new standard. The exceptions range from Thomas Jefferson to University of San Francisco.

As many know, there is a correlation between low passage rate in CA and:

•  Drop in enrollment at the those law schools
•  Increase of incoming students with lower LSAT scores and undergraduate grades.

Here are more details from Cheryl Miller at Law.com.

An interesting anecdote in CA is that it takes more than passing the bar exam to be admitted to the bar.

Stephen Glass had passed the bar exam in 2006. His name should sound familiar. He shook the world of journalism when it was discovered that he fabricated about 40 articles in the then-hot publication The New Republic. He was ousted.

Later he attended law school. The CA bar refused to admit him, based on a lack of moral character. Glass had the CA Supreme Court review that. It too turned thumbs-down. Here is the media coverage. 

Personal reflections: The nutty thing about the Glass saga was that he pursued a profession in which there was a good-character component in order to be licensed. But even more nutty is how many lawyers wind up losing their licenses or have them suspended because of illegal activities. One memorable case of that had been the fictional Will Gardner on popular television program "The Good Wife." So much for the character criterion in admission to the state bar.

CA has been taking initiatives to up the passage rate. Among them is an online program to help with the July exam. In addition, it will conduct a survey of lawyers to find out exactly what knowledge and skills are necessary to practice law in that state.

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

The Robert H. Strausses - So Much for Myth That Only Loser Types Are Targeted for Sexual Abuse

"Per a yearlong investigation conducted by Perkins Coie law firm, between the 1970s and 1990s, Ohio State doctor Richard H. Strauss targeted at least 177 male students ..." - Amanda Arnold, Crime Section of New York Magazine, May 17, 2019. Here is the article.

By now there have been many many Robert H. Strauss sagas of long-term sexual abuse of diverse kinds of victims. For instance, one recent investigation of the Boy Scouts of America found 12,254 cases of sexual abuse of members from 1944 through 2016. Here is that report from Fortune.

Obviously, what has to be blown up is the myth that only loser types become targets for sexual assault.

The reality is that in certain times in our lives or in certain contexts, we all could be vulnerable. 

The college kids probably just wanted to get through and get their degrees. They knew they needed the BA or BS. Because they were locked in the system, of course, they were targets. And most likely equal opportunity ones.

In the setting of an organization that society told you was wholesome, there is enormous vulnerability. Those boys didn't have to come from "broken homes" or be emotionally retarded to be preyed upon. They just had to be there, trusting.

Therefore, what's got to stop is saddling sexual-misconduct victims with some variation of the loser identification. 

Ronan Farrow's detailed exposes in The New Yorker of alleged sexual abuse by Harvey Weinstein and Les Moonves present myriad well-put together females who somehow got into the loop. Their vulnerability seems to be simply that they were in a glam industry. No surprise, those with powers would consider them prey.

Now we know that sexual abuse is widespread. 

It's been around a long time.

And it will remain a fixture in all parts of life until communities, organizations, and the legal system figure out how to deter it. That includes what goes on in families. By their very littleness, all children are vulnerable. 

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

The Media Innovator's Dilemma - From Ted Turner to David Lat

They build something that disrupts the media industry. 

The innovation works.

The experience is totally heady, with great influence. After all, it's said that media - not government, business or even technology - is the most powerful force in civilization. 

Then they sell that media outlet or simply move on to try out another role. What could play out next could be labeled The Media Innovator's Dilemma. 

For creator of 24/7 cable television news - Ted Turner - there was no next after he sold CNN.  He became just another businessperson whose former outsized presence went poof. Publicly, he indicated he regretted the sale. From then on, Turner seemed in mourning. And for a while, CNN's ratings plummeted. 

In the niche - legal media - the innovator had been creator of Abovehthelaw (ATL) David Lat. That began in 2006.

Officially he has left that role and become what is really a salesperson's job at headhunting firm Lateral Link. Its playing field is the legal sector.

Of course, that also constitutes a shift from being the boss to being an employee.

So far, Lat seems not to be able to totally let go of the legacy. He posts on ATL. It's in connection with his current headhunting  role, leveraging the aura of the innovation in hopes of developing new business. But, still, a clean break might have signaled amazing confidence in what is next.

As an employee, Lat won't be in charge. Instead he had to get the hang of fitting in to someone else's organizational culture. That's challenging.

In more rigid times in business, corporate employers hesitated hiring former entrepreneurs. They were wary that the transition might be impossible. That was the time of the Organizational Man (and Woman).

Since then, of course, careers paths have become less linear. More founders are parachuting into organizational functions. 

At best Lat could become a thought leader in the world of career strategies in the legal industry.

That's different than being a presence in media.

In his current role, his success depends on body count: How many placements he can make. Yeah, it's business, not mission of changing how news and commentary are positioned and packaged. The organization measures success in terms of that business metric. Either you make the sale or you don't make the sale. The game is binary. 

Lat could succeed at being a headhunter. He could adjust to employee status. He could also make more money than he had in media. But gone with his choice to give up ATL is the unique influence he had.

Media is the loudest voice in just about every context. That "loudest voice" is how journalist Gabriel Sherman summed up Fox News founder Roger Ailes. Here that book can be ordered from Amazon. According to some reports, after being ousted from Fox, Ailes was conferring with deep pockets such as Peter Thiel, who funded "Hogan v. Gawker," to fund launching a competitor to Fox. No, Ailes didn't plan to get a job in someone else's media outlet. 

Also, there is the issue if ATL, like CNN, will shift into a downward trajectory after the founder leaves. Part of the innovator's genius is a good head for the business of media. Are those business smarts embedded in ATL? The ATL DNA was Lat's genetic engineering. 

My hunch is that Lat could have moderate success in the headhunting space. But it's the media innovator's dilemma not to be able to make peace with the decline in influence.

Meanwhile, it would be shrewd reputation management for Lat to let go of ATL, in rebranding himself as a leader in executive search. Turner seemed incapable of that kind of reimagining his professional identity.

As for ATL, the niche of legal media seems ripe for another innovation. It could or could not come from the folks at ATL. A severe downturn can create demand for a fresh kind of analysis and presentation of issues. 

Full Disclosure: Since the late 1980s, I have been an entrepreneur. There I found extreme success versus organizational life. Recently I had a negative experience with Lateral Link. 

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Former WWE Perfomer Ashley Massaro, 39, Reported to Have Committed Suicide

Can a failed lawsuit "kill?"

Maybe.

All too often litigation becomes an obsession. When the legal system dismisses it those who had filed it could tumble into emotional despair and/or rage.

For former WWE performer Ashley Massaro the response might have been hopelessness.

In November 2016, she had participated in a class action lawsuit against WWE.

It contended WWE did not warn its performers about possible head injuries which could result in concussions. In addition, Massaro claimed she had been sexually assaulted when engaging in a WWE event.

The lawsuit had been dismissed.

Allegedly as a result of her injuries she suffered clinical depression and addiction to pain killers.

Now, it is reported that her death had been a suicide, at age 39, had been a suicide. Here is coverage by the media.

WWE has long been controversial. This death might prompt politicos to authorize a comprehensive investigation of the health and well-being of the performers.

There are those, however, who claim that the performers should be aware of the risks they take when entertaining. As with football, this sport may just continue on, as is. It's big business.

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Tony Robbins - Will BuzzFeed Investigation Do to Him What The New Yorker Ones Did to Harvey Weinstein, Les Moonves?

Law firm for celebrities Lavely & Singer denies it all. Among its clients is Bill Cosby. 

The "it" is the allegation of inappropriate behavior by mega guru Tony Robbins. That ranges from alleged verbal abuse of audience members to sexual misconduct with employees.

But BuzzFeed stands by its findings of an investigation which included leaked recordings, internal documents, and interviews. The focus of all that has been the alleged secret conduct of self-help coach Robbins.

Unlike mental health professionals, coaches in that niche do not require licensing. And Robbins' empire is closely guarded from media. His coaching presentations aren't allowed to be recorded.  Here is that BuzzFeed expose. 

Immediately one wonders if the BuzzFeed investigation will derail the career of Robbins, just like The New Yorker ones by Ronan Farrow did the professional life of Harry Weinstein and Les Moonves. Here is one of Farrow's articles on Weinstein, dated October 2017.

In addition, will these accusations prompt the push to license all those who declare themselves "coaches?" In some sophisticated circles, life coaches have replaced psychotherapists. 

The accusations are, well, colorful. Allegedly Robbins had his followers, as a tutorial, simulate sexual release. He berated those who claimed they were victims of rape. It was contended he would have his employees take notes in his apartment while he was naked, as in exiting the shower. Five women have made those kinds of sexual harassment claims. 

If these allegations can be proven or if Robbins caves and admits them, that would be no surprise. Power can unhinge judgment. Those with it might assume they can "get away" with unethical and illegal actions. They figure the victims will be too frightened to snitch. 

This story certainly has legs. The immediate issue is: Will it deliver a blow right now to Robbins' business interests? The #MeToo movement still has momentum. 

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

"Jane Smith, et al. v. United Healthcare and United Behavioral Health" - America No Land for Mental Illness/Addiction

Patrick Kennedy, son of Ted Kennedy, was the champion on this one: He helped push into law the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act.

Supposedly that was to create a level playing field in how healthcare insurers covered mental illness and sundry compulsions, including drug-taking. 

As Bloomberg reports in a major article, that's not what has been unfolding.

Over the phone and in the legal system there is a brutal battle to receive treatment which is paid in full or in part by insurance.

A recent high profile lawsuit has been the class action "Jane Smith v. United Healthcare Insurance Co. and United Behavioral Health." Here is a copy of the complaint. So far it's been a victory for the plaintiff class but few expect that decision to endure. A decertification of the class is anticipated on appeal. 

In that litigation, reports Modern Healthcare:

"A federal judge ruled ... that United Behavioral Health breached its fiduciary duty to patients by using unreasonable and overly restrictive guidelines to make coverage decisions for tens of thousands of mental health and substance abuse patients."

Meanwhile, as Bloomberg hammers, America is in a mental health and addiction crisis. All too frequently that ends in suicide. To that we can add: Violence in schools, the workplace, and churches.

Yet, the elephant in the room is the question: What is effective treatment for mental illness and abuse of substances, be it booze or food (or the lack of food as in anorexia)?

So little is still known about that. Among the families of those with those syndromes there are familiar stories of the young adult having 30-day (expensive) stays in multiple rehab facilities - and continually relapsing. Death is not uncommon. That can happen through what appears to be an "accidental" overdose or suicide. 

Also, there is the issue of transparency. As I explain in this article, both insurers and clients must demand more detailed information about the mindset of the healthcare professional, what clinical approaches are being used, why, the expected outcomes, progress so far, and what alternatives are being considered. 

The insurers are not necessarily the bad guys.

Perhaps the real villain is the lack of useful research on what works and what doesn't. Obviously, not much is working.

That even applies to the "free" mode of treatment - Alcoholics Anonymous (AA). Too often it is the model for treatment in rehab centers. Stays at those rehabs can be billed at a thousand bucks a day. In a very real sense we are all paying for that.

Also, courts continue to "sentence" substance abusers to AA.

However, AA's success rate, according to addiction specialists, ranges between 8% and 12%. Now classic is the 2105 The Atlantic article analyzing the poor track record of AA. Here is that manifesto. 

Sure, let the court cases continue. Legal rulings have been a game-changer in America.

But perhaps what might be the most productive move would be to conduct a multi-disciplinary investigation (including hard-nosed business types) of what is going on in understanding, treating, and paying the bill for mental illness and substance abuse. 

Until answers are found families will be in turmoil, careers will be derailed, violence will occur, and lots of folks will die. That's just the way it is. But that's not the way it has to be. 

Full Disclosure: From age 11 I have suffered chronic clinical depression. You bet, along the way I received pricey but what I assess as unhelpful treatment. What has been effective is no-cost mindfulness. When my mood is darkening, I stop my day and meditate for two or three minutes. I was trained in mindfulness, without any fee, at the Zen Center, near Yale, in New Haven, Connecticut. 

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Law Firms & The Next Recession: Growing Media Niche

Some members of the legal media, such as David Packel at Law.com, have carved a new niche. It's focusing on the coming recession (yes, it will come, only the time and severity are uncertain) and how it could affect law firms.

In his latest installment on that, Packel notes that there has been some effort among law firms to become more, well, business-like. For example, some have hired operation directors to ensure more efficiency. 

However, those of us familiar with the business models of large law firms know they could be in great distress if the economic downturn is severe. 

On the one hand, there are The Great Untouched. They're the elite ones you never get fired using them. They handle the bet the ranch lawsuits and high stake transactions. 

But all the rest could wind up conducting massive reductions in force as well as stealth layoffs. The body count could be more than 10,000. During the good times they kept raising salaries and bonuses. Already demand is flat and expenses are rising. So, some could be struggling now, although that hasn't become public yet. But it could as soon as a disgruntled associate or paralegal leaks to the media how many lawyers are without assignments.

Given the possible carnage, of course, this is a good story to develop. However, the recession could be mild and law firms will continue being the inefficient entities they are.

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

The Story Is a Strong, Solid Economy - Bank Officers Put Out There a Different Version

More and more of the media coverage in law focuses on how badly positioned many firms are for a severe economic downturn.

Here, for example is Dan Packel's analysis in Law.com.

In business news, such as The Wall Street Journal, there is the pile on of speculation by experts what could trigger The Whopper.

For instance, here is WSJ coverage of how 2/3rds of chief financial officers predict the end is near and that many corporations aren't adequately prepared.

The fear is palpable.

Yet the numbers are supposed to be telling a story of job growth, low unemployment, a sustained bull stock market, and even an uptick in stagnant wages.

There may be an explanation for the disconnect. 

Axios reports:

"Bankers say they have increasing concern about future economic growth, despite continued U.S. labor market strength and solid fundamentals. The data banks are seeing runs contrary to the overall narrative of a strong U.S. economy."

The dots banks are connecting create a narrative of financial over-extension and the inability to pony up the payments when due. The key number is that during Q1 of 2019, credit card delinquencies were at their highest point since 2012. 

The red flag in that is that the trend of taking on too much debt has been adopted by the 18 to 29 demographic.

They have embraced the American way of debt which impeded recovery from The Great Recession. No longer are young people debt-averse. That had been a value of iGen the media had chronicled right after the worldwide economic crash. They bore witness to their parents and relatives losing jobs. Unlike Baby Boomers, they grew up in hard times.

That was then.

There is now a psychic shift. Entrepreneurs are feeding that. The probable personal finance disaster starts off with the decision of youth to start their careers in an urban area with a high cost of living. No, they can't afford New York City, San Francisco, or Chicago. No, they shouldn't be there.

But come they do.

To finance the security deposit and first few months rent, reports The Wall Street Journal, they can easily turn to lenders such as Domuso and Till. The annual interest rate ranges from 20% to 700%. Some assess this as a more refined version of the payday lender.

Not only do members of the younger generations get caught up in being over-extended. They can develop the habit of approaching financial challenges through debt. Instead of picking up side hustles, in addition to the day job, they charge more on credit cards. 

Will all this come crashing down?

That is the angst.

The way to minimize damage to one's business and personal finances is to anticipate negative developments. That isn't only paying off debt and cutting back. It also entails simultaneously figuring out growth strategies for both an enterprise and the funds coming into a household. 

In the legal sector, those negative signs include flat demand. As a result some firms are revisiting what had become standard compensation patterns. Simultaneously they are zeroing in on fresh ways of attracting new business in what is essentially a zero-sum game. Here is the first part of Lateral Link's rainmaking series, free to download. 

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Yes, 2018 Was a Very Good Year - But, Since 2019 May Not Be, Legal Sector Rethinking Associate Compensation

Recent reports by Citi Private Bank and Thomson Reuters document a 2019 trend in large law firms: Demand is flat and expenses are up.

That means for the majority of them raising entry-level associate compensation to $190k in profitable 2018 could bite them in the butt in 2019. In Law.com, Dan Packel presents this problem, which could turn urgent. 

Because of worldwide uncertainties, the deal flows have slowed. That means that a lot of lucrative transactional assignments which would have been made remain on hold.

Litigation is still as strong as in 2018. However, if corporate clients sense a recession is imminent they could delay filing lawsuits. 

Packel notes that there will be a small number of firms which can weather any of the 2019 storms. But the others may be forced to revisit their assumptions about compensation.

Already out there is the notion that law firms don't have to move in lock step with those who boost compensation significantly. They could resist and probably, if they are known for doing quality legal work, still attract job applicants from the T-14.

Many newbie law graduates are more interested in intellectually stimulating work and experience than a lot of money. Sure, they need "enough" to be able to live in a metro area and pay off student loans. The question for law firms is: So, what is enough?

This issue of enough is one that is resonating globally. This is a time when everyone from think tanks to workers on the factory floor are becoming critical of the standard assumptions of capitalism. Harvard Business School has an elective titled "Reimagining Capitalism."

The American Bar Association might conduct a panel titled "Reimagining Compensation."

Maybe this is no coincidence. Two days ago I received "permission" from my executive coach that it was going to be okay for me to accept communications assignments which don't pay top dollar. I want to do them because it's the kind of work I love. Yet capitalism had socialized me to max my earning power.  

Exactly the right tone and content for all your communications. Complimentary consultation janegenova374@gmail.com.