What does Law Day mean to you?

Posted on April 30, 2010 by Susan Hackett, GC

 

May 1 offers lawyers an opportunity to reflect on what the law “means” to each of us, those we serve, and the larger interests of society.  Law Day in the US often includes ceremonial celebrations, recommitment to the highest values of our profession and public service (and yes, even bar association missives on the importance of what we do).  

But really, do you care?  You’re very busy, and nothing that happens on Law Day really changes anything about the way you work or the challenges you face or the likelihood that you’ll make it home in time for dinner.  But I predict that what happened in the last several months and what is coming in the next year will impact all of these concerns and more. Are you ready?

At ACC, we can see seismic and fundamental change penetrating the “business model” governing the relationship between in-house and outside counsel. Perhaps the impact of these changes are still simmering below the surface in your office, and you may feel confident that after a tumultuous 2009, things may be heading back to “normal” in 2010 (and we can all revert to business as usual) or perhaps the pot that holds your workload and concerns is boiling over and you’re seeing that something, indeed, many things, are likely to give in the next year.   I predict that regardless of which group you fall into, by May 1, 2011, the way we practice law in-house, and the way our firms serve their clients will have transformed in significant ways, changing from a focus on law firm profit-per-partner, to a focus on value and client satisfaction.  While the shift — like any change — will be hard and will subject us all to risks and discomforts many would prefer to avoid, the result could drastically improve our client’s outcomes and lawyer career paths, job satisfaction, and productivity.  

So here’s the question I ask you to join me in answering on Law Day 2010:

What needs to happen in the next 12 months, either in-house or in outside firm practice (or both), for your practice, your client’s legal outcomes, or your ability to serve your client to improve?

I urge you to use the “Comment” button at the bottom of this post to answer the above question. Your thoughts and answers are valuable to ACC and you can also read your fellow members’ responses to benchmark your own thoughts. And after you’ve answered, please take a moment to reflect on what your answer suggests you need to do to help make change happen.  Will you make the path by walking?  Your decision to drive the future of our profession is one of the most worthy pursuits you can undertake today.

Remember: The best way you honor our profession is by being an active participant in it – it’s up to you: DRIVE CHANGE. DRIVE IMPROVEMENT. DRIVE VALUE.

 

 

 

Tags: , , ,

A Tribute to Bob Banks

Posted on January 5, 2009 by Larry Salibra

A short time ago, I blogged about the importance of building a life line before you needed it. In that blog I described the value of the connections you would make with your ACC colleagues as an end in itself. Fred Krebs recently helped me reconnect with Bob Banks, former General Counsel of Zerox, and the father of ACC.

ACC was formed by a number of energetic and farsighted in-house lawyers. But among this group of talented lawyers one stood out.  For those of us who were around at ACC’s beginning, it was clear that Bob was the spark that created this organization.

I came to know Bob through a reference of a lawyer at the Ohio Lawyer’s Disciplinary Commission. I had been referred to the Commission by the then Chief Judge of the Ohio Supreme Court to whom I had written questioning Ohio’s policy of not permitting one to count time spent in Ohio as an in-house lawyer towards reciprocity admission, while the same time could be counted for reciprocity admission in New York. The Judge, apparently unaware of the rule permitting in-house attorneys to practice in Ohio without being formally admitted, concluded that I was practicing in Ohio without a license and referred me the disciplinary commission.

Chief Judge Celebrezze (as distinguished from Anthony Celebrezze of the Sixth Circuit) was widely reported as using the disciplinary commission as a means of dealing with any controversy concerning his role in office, and there was quite a bit. The lawyer at the commission was understanding and disturbed by the misuse of the office and referred me to Bob Banks, who was reported according to him, as beginning an organization that might just address admission issues for in-house counsel and lawyers generally.

After talking with Bob on the phone I met him for the first time, and I have still have a vivid memory of the meeting, at the Corporate Counsel Institute at Northwestern University Law School. ACC, then ACCA, was an idea coming to life.

I renewed my correspondence with Bob a few days ago (thanks to Fred Krebs sending me a current e-mail address) and have begun once again to share ideas on current issues in the profession. It made me recall the hope and spirit of confronting challenges that infused ACC’s creation.

Bob and his colleagues who founded ACC gave us a great gift—an organization that permits us to change and improve ourselves and our profession in way that none of us could do without it. This Holiday Season we need to remember these founders who built an organization whose creation was not without opposition and controversy. And we should remember that we can best honor their effort by using the organization to its potential.
 

Tags: , , , , , , ,