• Home
  • News
  • The New Untouchables: Lawyers Who Can Imagine a Better Way

Careers

The New Untouchables: Lawyers Who Can Imagine a Better Way

Posted Oct 21, 2009 7:21 AM CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss

Lawyers at one Washington law firm who survived layoffs—the untouchables—had the ability to imagine a better way of working.

The unidentified firm is mentioned in an article by a New York Times op-ed columnist who argues a better education system is key to the nation’s economic recovery. Until workers have the skills to compete globally, the recession fueled by the end of credit and asset bubbles won’t abate, columnist Thomas Friedman says.

Those who survive the recession will have the imagination to make themselves “untouchables” because they can imagine smarter ways to do old jobs or attract new customers. He illustrates with this example:

“A Washington lawyer friend recently told me about layoffs at his firm. I asked him who was getting axed. He said it was interesting: Lawyers who were used to just showing up and having work handed to them were the first to go because with the bursting of the credit bubble, that flow of work just isn’t there. But those who have the ability to imagine new services, new opportunities and new ways to recruit work were being retained. They are the new untouchables.”

According to the article, “Just being an average accountant, lawyer, contractor or assembly-line worker is not the ticket it used to be.”

Comments

1.

B. McLeod
Oct 21, 2009 7:32 AM CST

Well, obviously this Friedman isn’t reading the newspaper.  He’s still telling people “the recession won’t abate,” even though it has repeatedly been declared to be over and done with.

Flag this comment

2.

capplebaum
Oct 21, 2009 8:28 AM CST

More education?  I recently read statistics that stated that over half the college graduates were working in jobs that required less than a high school education.  The problem seems to me that we are overly educated and overly student loan indentured.  More education is not the answer to the outsourcing of our economy.

Flag this comment

3.

Esq.
Oct 21, 2009 8:39 AM CST

How about making higher education more affordable?  And improving the availability of quality vocational and technical education schools?

Flag this comment

4.

Susan Cartier Liebel
Oct 21, 2009 8:42 AM CST

The new ‘untouchables’ are those who are have the ability to go solo if they choose because they are their own ‘profit’ centers within a law firm.  Historically, in a recession any one who is considered overhead is cut.  Overhead in a knowledge industry is one who is incapable of generating revenue.  Showing up and getting work handed to you is work someone else who generated it can do.

As for the recession being over because the papers said so??  I offer you this video (listen to principle #2). The recession is not over. We are just in a temporary eye of the storm and the bulls are feeling temporarily frisky.

http://bit.ly/gcPqL

Ignore at your peril

Flag this comment

5.

Anony
Oct 21, 2009 9:07 AM CST

The Untouchables are the attorneys who have been laid off.  Now no one will look at them.  Even firms looking to hire don’t want someone who was laid off.

Flag this comment

6.

Lee
Oct 21, 2009 10:38 AM CST

I wonder whether Mr. Friedman will be singing this “can do” song when the New York Times lays him off in the inevitable budget cuts that are coming, given the ocean of red ink in which the New York Times is drowning.

Flag this comment

7.

Philip
Oct 22, 2009 6:29 PM CST

so, rainmakers keep their jobs even during recessions? Wow, what a stunning insight. No wonder they pay Friedman the big bucks.

Flag this comment

8.

Anon
Oct 23, 2009 5:48 AM CST

No one is untouchable! As a summer associate at a Magic Circle English firm, I thought I was untouchable because our managing partner created a “buddy” scheme where each of us were to become “buddies” with a prospective client. My “buddy” was a Fortune 100 client with work. They took the client but they didn’t take me.

Flag this comment

9.

Barbara D'Amico
Oct 23, 2009 6:21 AM CST

Anyone struck by the power of Friedman’s observation or anyone unpersuaded by it should read Daniel Pink’s A Whole New Mind. Pink posits that the future belongs to those who are right brain directed and creative in developing new services and in imagining new ways to deliver old services.  Perhaps they will also imagine ways to reduce burn out and keep more talent in the workplace!

Flag this comment

10.

e
Oct 23, 2009 6:22 AM CST

Freidman is forever opining about the state of the world based on the notions of a buddy. He offers little insight and it is unclear why anyone is interested in his assessment of the legal community.

Also—interesting that generating business is key to keeping a legal job. How about doing the work exceptionally well?

Some people make rain—other people make law. Too bad we live in a society so sad that it values only numbers even in its allegedly intellectual professions.

Flag this comment

11.

Kevin
Oct 23, 2009 8:01 AM CST

Friedman is making an important point - more education is the best way to prepare a population for new opportunities and to generate innovative ideas that can grow an economy.  He is not saying that lawyers are uneducated, only that Americans in general are less educated than many of our developed country counterparts, and a growing number of developing countries as well.  I recently read that only 27% of Americans have a college degree.  Many jobs do require less than a college degree, but those are not the type of jobs that will grow the economy - they will only stabilize it.  We need to create more jobs that require college degrees and that allow us, as Americans, to innovate our way to success.  Our position in the global economy has been slowly slipping, and Friedman is making the point that if we don’t invest in education, we may not find our way back up.

Flag this comment

12.

MDF
Oct 23, 2009 8:04 AM CST

Years ago, I heard a speech by Gordon B. Hinckley wherein he commented that the distance between first and last place in the 100 meter dash is very small.  At the end of the day, it is the little bit of extra effort that can make all the difference in our very competitive world.  That is a correct principle and it applies in the legal profession.  The key is to make an extra effort each day in applying our legal skils and abilities in new and innovative ways.

Flag this comment

13.

KM
Oct 23, 2009 10:06 AM CST

Does anyone think that other countries might be better educated because the schools are free or fairly inexpensive?  We spend hundreds of thousands just to get bachelors’ degrees, and then more to get professional degrees, while European countries educate their professionals in undergrad.  Did I really need to spend my time in undergrad taking “general studies” classes like weather and art appreciation when I planned on going to law school?

Flag this comment

14.

Alex
Oct 23, 2009 11:13 AM CST

Friedman may have an important point, but I don’t see how it applies to the vast majority of lawyers who lost their jobs, many of whom were relatively junior. Even if they were bringing in work (and junior associates are primarily evaluated based on their hours billed, not the business they bring in), they certainly were not in a position to be defining how the work was to be done.

Flag this comment

15.

SR
Oct 25, 2009 9:43 PM CST

Freidman is an idiot.

Flag this comment

16.

Doug
Oct 26, 2009 12:13 AM CST

There is also an element of luck.  Are your clients the ones who decided to bring their work in-house?  Are your clients the ones who to everyone’s surprise decided to file for bankruptcy?  Are your clients the ones who brought in new management who wanted to choose their own outside counsel?

Flag this comment

17.

June
Oct 26, 2009 2:37 AM CST

I agree with Doug:  Luck is always an element.  Serendipity is highly underrated, especially by those who think they have more to do with their success than others.  As for me, I got axed way before this latest financial downturn, and feel I’m probably the luckiest of all, having been forced to re-create myself, both as a legal services provider, and by expanding on a variety of consulting services I could offer.  I thought I was the new untouchable when I decide to read this article.

Flag this comment

18.

Joe
Oct 26, 2009 8:42 AM CST

I wonder if Friedman would view himself as an “untouchable” in the field of journalism. In my humble opinion, his work could easily be duplicated, if not done better, by an Indian journalist at a tenth of the cost!

Flag this comment

19.

B. McLeod
Oct 27, 2009 12:33 AM CST

Have they a genuine Indian guru?

Flag this comment

20.

MJEgan
Oct 27, 2009 2:27 PM CST

The point is about creativity.  A number of folks have been plumbing this issue for some time - e.g., the rise of the creative class, right-brain thinking, etc.  The problem is how we think about education.  At this point so much of the “education system” is institutionalized and static.  Take these courses, sit through the lectures, take an exam, get a degree.  First year lawyers are not worthless but they haven’t been trained in the technical practice of law.  On the other hand, they may be quite good at issue spotting, creative analogizing and thinking through arguments made by legal intellectuals (when is the last time partner x in California read a Posner opinion or a Sunstein book?).  Unfortunately, senior lawyers get paid a lot to do that work already.  Junior lawyers get pushed into VERY menial jobs, getting trained very slowly, so much so that the creative types start to leave firms or they lost their creativity.  the firms then end up with uncreative, think inside the box types, and then complain that they don’t have a group of high fliers who can be the next generation of leaders.  Creative lawyers then try to go solo, but they still don’t have technical training (how do i file a complaint? who do i have to serve?  what should be notarized? how do i not only bill but make sure i get paid?  etc.).  So, you have a profession that is either cutting out its creative thinkers or pushing them into the highly marginalized worlds of family and criminal law without any technical know how.  We need to both encourage innovative thinking in education AND increase technical training in law school.

Flag this comment

Add a Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.

Commenting has expired on this post.