Why Do We Work?

I’ve been meaning to write about an article available on Law.com, titled Commentary: Why Do We Work?, by Gregory S. Gallopoulos (managing partner and co-chair of the Tax Controversy Practice at Jenner & Block) since it was published in September. Monday morning may be the ideal time to pose this question, especially for those who suffer from the Sunday blues and dread beginning the official work week.

You likely won’t be surprised that the first answer, according to Gallopoulos, is money. But the bulk of the article drills into his second answer: we work for sanity, and it’s imperative that “managers of elite firms” pay close attention to the noneconomic rewards that are important to lawyers. I’d suggest that all lawyers need to pay attention to this, both from a management/supervision perspective and from the personal “am I really getting what I need?” perspective. I’d also suggest that all firms have the opportunity to be “elite” by supporting their attorneys in the identified ways to provide excellent client service.

Gallopoulos identifies five categories of noneconomic rewards: professional identity, personal pride, idealism, recognition, and institutional pride. I’d like to focus on professional identity, and specifically on what it means to new(er) lawyers, or lawyers in a new practice setting, to develop such an identity. Gallopoulos highlights three aspects of professional identity: scholarship, autonomy, and ethics.

Although anecdotes support the common impression that a number of people go to law school because it’s the fallback route to being a professional, sort of a catchall for those who don’t like blood or science, it’s reasonably safe to say that most of us landed in law school after a quite respectable tour through college. We’re good at logic, and we tend to enjoy delving into topics of personal or professional interest. That said, I think most lawyers tend to discard true scholarship shortly after finishing law school. Think about it: lawyers may write articles, but they’re usually practice-oriented. We tend to become utilitarian, focused on what will assist our clients, and less interested in taking the time to pursue deeper questions of scholarship. I’m not about to argue that lawyers should become professional scholars, but I do think Gallopoulos is wise to suggest feeding lawyers’ intellect. This aspect of most professionals tends to be neglected because resolution of most legal problems calls for workmanlike logic rather than scholarship. The rejoinder, of course, is that some lawyers are interested in the practical application of law and not in the abstract ponderings of what law should be. And that’s fine. But I’d ask, if you enjoyed the scholarship of law school, how do you keep the scholar alive within yourself?

And a sidenote: perhaps scholarship doesn’t even have to relate to the law. A good lawyer is, in my opinion, a well-rounded individual. So if you’re interested in Roman history or politics or neurobiology, pursuit of those interests will contribute to your professional development just as much as digging into a legal issue. Just remember to ask the next question: how does study in this field bear on me as a lawyer, on my clients, or on the rule of law?

Autonomy describes the opportunity to exercise professional judgment, and Gallopoulos encourages firms to permit each lawyer to develop an individual style of practice. “Empowering lawyers in this way inculcates a heightened sense of professional responsibility, which in turn reinforces the drive for individual excellence.” But how do lawyers, especially lawyers at large firms, develop professional judgment? This aspect of professional development requires more than good training: it requires mentorship from a more senior lawyer. It requires having access to someone who not only directs but also explains. If a newer lawyer lacks this kind of mentorship, he may learn what to do but not why to do it. Although many firms espouse the goal of growing lawyers in this way, few succeed institutionally. Successful lawyers seek out mentors (more than one) who are available to discuss and teach. This is arguably the more important aspect of professional development, because while autonomy is indeed a professional value, exercise of autonomy without a solid base of knowledge and skill is dangerous at best. And ethics flows with autonomy, since the exercise of professional judgment without an ethical foundation is antithetical to professionalism.

So, on this Monday morning, I ask: have you dipped your toes into the sea of scholarship recently? Do you have a mentor who is helping you to develop your own professional judgment? Along with the other rewards of work that Gallopoulos mentions, working to develop your professional identity is likely to lead to deeper satisfaction in the law and in your life.

Julie Fleming Brown coaches attorneys on professional development, career management, and client development issues. Please visit www.LifeAtTheBar.com for more information, or contact Julie at 800.758.6214.

NOTE:  The Life at the Bar blog has MOVED!  To find the latest posts about time management and productivity, business development, communications skills, leadership development, and much more relevant to lawyers and the practice of law, please visit www.lifeatthebar.com/blog.

Explore posts in the same categories: For new lawyers, The practice