How do we start?
I get really excited when a partner at a firm reaches out to ask a question or start a conversation about their firm.
It means an acknowledgment that better solutions are needed, that change at any level is being considered and ultimately, a recognition that accompaniment and support in this endeavor is beneficial (they came to me đ„)
At this point, itâs simple enough to conduct an introductory sales cycle:
Meet with partner and graciously gain as much context as you can about their challenges and what they are seeking.
Ascertain who the decision makers are and (typically) have a second meeting with all key stakeholders. More empathy, curiosity and a humble posture of learning as you gain more insight into the depth of challenges present. Note: the challenges or requirements will likely shift in this stage as you gain more clarity about the scope of work.
Send a proposal that organically forms from the context youâve built which may include: scope of work, pricing (I use a subscription based system so itâll be fixed) and phased approach to completion. You leave room for reviews and options to continue or stop the work (another perk of a subscription service with no lock-in).
To most people these new conversations feel like a start - but along a continuum of change we really havenât. It also often proves to be one or two stakeholders enthusiasm that isnât shared with the entire pool of decision makers.
The difference between the stakeholders that reached out and those that donât share this enthusiasm, is Starting vs Stopping.
What do I mean by that? Let me explainâŠ
One of the fascinating realities of the âinfinite churnâ business model of traditional law firms is that the core revenue is attached directly to the amount of hours, minutes and even seconds* worked against the clients file. This means that time literally is money: time spent on client file = time billed to the client file.
(*As I was writing this I smiled at the suggestion of seconds, but Iâm certain a policy about rounding anything less than a minute up or down has been decided before. It has definitely plagued the mind of countless junior solicitors as a serious concern in the unfortunate circumstance where there wasnât an explicit policy - what a nightmare!)
I was recently discussing with a colleague who advises a mid-tier firm in the eastern states (of Australia) about change and the complexities of trying to initiate change within the current partnership model knowing that time literally is money.
The question simply put was how do we start?
How do we start this conversation/presentation/discussion/board-meeting about change in the firm? Interestingly, the answer came to me and it seemed counter-intuitive.
We have to stop, to start.
We have to understand that to consider change and the future of our firm (no matter the timeline) means we canât hold the value of our time to the same standard as when we are working.
In other words, the people who are in a position to lead the firm need to truly value their time enough to actually stop.
Only when we stop, we can then reflect.
When we reflect, we consolidate and adjust.
But we also allow for new information, for new ideas and for exploration.
We become curious, playful, expansive and flexible.
Those are key ingredients to start the journey to change.
So how do we start? First we stop.
Q.