I was the first “professor” of Solo Practice University announced. Now I’m the first former professor. I am, if nothing else, full of firsts.
Following Mark Merenda’s resurgence to hype lawyer marketing, and my response, I realized that I had a problem. You see, Merenda, though not a lawyer, was also a “professor” at Susan Cartier Leibel’s Solo Practice University. In light of my feelings on the subject, it struck me that this might not be a good fit. I was not comfortable being in the middle of marketers, telling new solos to put on red lipstick and sell themselves, as if this was the sine qua non of being a solo practitioner.
I decided to contact Susan and tell her that I thought it best that I withdraw from SPU.
Upon receiving my email, Susan urged me to speak with her first. She implored me not to make a hasty decision, and to sleep on this for a while. I felt very badly about putting Susan in the position of losing someone in her newborn venture, not because I was indispensable but because it created controversy where there should be none. So I agreed to wait.
Apparently, a good night’s sleep can work wonders, as Susan emailed me the next day to tell me that she had received emails from the marketing “professors” at SPU, who feared that I might “tarnish their reputations” by a “vicious attack,” as I did Merenda. Because of this, Susan was pressured to toss me out on me ear. And so she did. Susan noted that it was not merely because they were pressuring her, but because my attack on Merenda was so vicious and personal. From Susan’s email:
But the fact is, I don’t agree with the personal and vicious attack (and it was vicious) even though it was your own blog and even if I didn’t know Mark. If you had no readership and the comments died on the vine, maybe it could have disappeared as something unfortunate. But the very fact you have the readership you do it’s only gotten bigger and taken on a life of its own, spawning new blogs posts about it, then getting retweeted to a wider audience creating further commentary (none of which support the ‘personal attack’ and it’s OK because it’s my blog) Pandora’s Box can’t be closed.
I don’t begrudge Susan’s view that my response to Merenda was wrong, notwithstanding her overnight change of heart. But I never asked for anyone’s approval of what I write here, and have no intention of subjecting my comments to Susan’s approval for the benefit of SPU. That was never the deal.
The dichotomy between practicing lawyers and marketers has grown immensely over the past few years, particularly in the blawgosphere and internet generally. I understand that some lawyers feel the need to market themselves, and that they will justify and defend their decision because without marketing they sit alone in their office with no one to talk to. It can get very lonely when you can’t attract a client based on the quality of your representation.
Was I so vicious to Merenda, who embodies one of the worst forces destroying the profession? Maybe, but I can live with that. I never became a lawyer to please others, and didn’t start this blawg for self-promotion. As I told Susan during our conversation, I believe that the legal marketing trend is one of the most destructive forces to the legal profession there is, and I am against it, will rail against it and will, in the course of my teaching at SPU, explain that lawyers do not need to demean themselves to make a living. They need to know how to be great lawyers.
What is unfortunate is that the concept that Susan is introducing at SPU is a great one, filling a huge void in legal and practical education. But there remains a question of what that gap is. Is “going solo” all about shrugging off one’s dignity and doing whatever you have to do to get a client? Is it about learning the substance of specific practice areas, the unique issues that arise and how to deal with them, as well as how to establish oneself as a top quality lawyer? Then, clients come to you instead of you having to walk the streets wearing a sandwich board. Will this really be Solo Practice University, or Solo Marketing University?
An interesting aside, which is worth noting only because of what it shows about the various approaches, is that my way of addressing a conflict with the marketers was not to demand that Susan get rid of Merenda, but to withdraw myself. The marketers, on the other hand, whined that Susan had to get rid of me, because I might viciously attack them. As one would expect, they pushed Susan to save them from the evil Greenfield who might tarnish their reputation by telling the truth, the thing marketers fear most. Make what you will of this detail.
So, for those who were interested in starting a solo criminal practice, you will have to find instruction from someone else. I won’t be there to help you figure out how to do it, or to decide what type of lawyer you really want to be. There may not be anyone in my “professor” seat willing to take the chance of contradicting the many sweet voices telling you that it’s okay to put on the lipstick and offer yourself for sale.
Still, I can offer this one word of caution. It’s a lie. Everybody doesn’t do it. Marketers make their living off you believing that it’s okay, that the law isn’t a profession but a business, and everybody in business sells, sells, sells. Other lawyers who do it want you to do it too, so they won’t feel as dirty and ashamed about themselves. But great lawyers don’t walk the streets in search of clients. Envision where you want to be ten years after you’ve gone solo, then consider whether the best way to get there is to take the high road or the low road. Chose wisely.
With all the happy marketers on board at SPU, I’m sure they will instruct you well on how to package a lawyer with a pretty red ribbon. What they cannot teach you is how to make sure there is something inside the box. That’s not what they do.
So, today I relinquish my SPU faculty badge and wish Susan and Solo Practice University the best in helping lawyers to strike out on their own. And to those who might otherwise have been my “students”, never forget that you are members of a profession. You can maintain dignity and professionalism, and still thrive as solo practitioners.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’ve been making myself breakfast and chuckling over this the whole time. A solo practitioner who won’t fall in and support the greater good of the organization? What are the chances? Suddenly I think I see a flaw in Susan Leibel’s recruiting plan for instructors to teach solo practice…
A law firm around here recently hired a closer. The person isn’t a lawyer. His job is literally to close sales when prospective clients call.
Even for someone like me, who isn’t even anti-marketing, I think that’s a bit unseemly.
The Seduction of Self-Fulfilling Rationalizations
Now that I’m free from the chains of having to please my masters, something I obviously didn’t do very well, I can address the continuing onslaught in the battle between reason and the almighty dollar.
The Seduction of Self-Fulfilling Rationalizations
Now that I’m free from the chains of having to please my masters, something I obviously didn’t do very well, I can address the continuing onslaught in the battle between reason and the almighty dollar.
The Seduction of Self-Fulfilling Rationalizations
Now that I’m free from the chains of having to please my masters, something I obviously didn’t do very well, I can address the continuing onslaught in the battle between reason and the almighty dollar.
The Seduction of Self-Fulfilling Rationalizations (Update)
Now that I’m free from the chains of having to please my masters, something I obviously didn’t do very well, I can address the continuing onslaught in the battle between reason and the almighty dollar.
I wish Mark had sent a very inventive insult in response to Scott’s.
I wish Susan had told Scott, “stay on. We have room for everybody,” and to everyone else, “everyone and anyone is free to leave.” I doubt that she would regret it.
Isn’t there a difference between various types of marketing? I think you are throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Writing an article in the NYLJ is a form of marketing, and if a potential client reads what you have written, and says, ‘that’s one smart lawyer! I’m a gonna hire him/her’ haven’t you accomplished the dual goals of building a successful practice and being a top quality lawyer?
I agree that comparing yourself in a print ad to an animal is trite and stupid, but the fact is, there are a lot of good attorneys out there. Separating the wheat from the chaff is one thing, differentiating yourself from the other wheat is more difficult.
Of course there are differences. These posts can either anticipate readers who are day-trippers or regular readers. The regular reader will know that I’ve discussed this subject numerous times and make a clear distinction between passive marketing, that which flows naturally from good work or thoughtful commentary such as a NYLJ article, and active marketing.
Simply because good work has the collateral consequence of serving as an unintended market tool does not make it marketing. It’s purpose is to do good work. That it serves to market the attorney cannot be helped. It’s not a negative consequence, but it’s not intended either. Therein lies the difference. The same is true of winning a big case. Do we win to market or win to win? That it highlights skills is a nice consequences, but certainly not the reason we fight so hard to win our cases.
I usually urge people like you, who read one post and assume to understand the point well enough to comment, to read further if you would like to have a better understanding of what I’m saying. Of course, some prefer not to read further but still want to comment in the absence of a better understanding. It takes all kinds.
I think you’re trying to hide the ball here. What you are calling ‘passive marketing’ as if it comes naturally from your work, is ‘active’ as well. Unless you are already well known in your field, the NYLJ doesn’t come knocking on your door, looking for articles. Speaking opportunities don’t just show up, unnanounced. And none of those things have to provide any link back to your practice, even if the NYLJ just decided randomly to ask you to write something. And I’ll point out that this blog, which may have a primary purpose of being a vehicle for your to discuss your ideas, also links back to your practice and your website at the top. The only possible reason is that anyone who likes what you post could then hire you when they need you in the future. If your motives were as pure as you profess, that link would not be there.
Futher, while I may not have read all your posts on the subject, most people either link to prior posts, so that newcomers can catch up, or at the very least, do not criticise newcomers to their blog. Unless you have decided you like your regular crew here, and new people need not apply.
You’ve overlayed your personal assumption, that others are as unworthy of note as you and must shill for recognition. That may well describe your circumstance, but don’t assume that it describes anyone else. Your obviously limited experience does not reflect the norm, but only that of someone struggling to be recognized when they are unable to obtain recognition by virtue of their performance. You aren’t alone, but thankfully aren’t the norm.
As for the “more info” link, you again jump to the self-projected assumption that “the only possible reason” is self-promotion. This is the common reaction of those who are obsessed with marketing themselves, as it is their frame of reference. However, it’s wrong. The other possible reason is that you’re spending time reading the opinions of someone you don’t know, and cannot, without information about the author, form your own opinion on whether the author has any credibility. So once again, you’ve shown your mypoia.
Worse still, this discussion has been had in the past. Numerous times. But it’s still so much fun to reinvent the wheel everytime a newbie shows up, all full of piss and vinegar, to repeat oneself so that you don’t have to have a clue when you assert your manhood.
But then there’s your whining at the end that you weren’t treated with enough love and respect. How unfortunate that I’ve failed to meet your newcomer expectations of entitlement to post a mind-numbingly stupid comment and be treated well.
Newcomers are indeed welcome. You, however, are not.
Wanna Be A Solo (or, Solo is the New Black)
For as long as I can remember, the goal of those nerds who would rather sleep in the library than throw back a beer bong with their “study” group was a signing bonus at Biglaw, the surest path to wealth and prestige the law had to offer.
Wanna Be A Solo (or, Solo is the New Black)
For as long as I can remember, the goal of those nerds who would rather sleep in the library than throw back a beer bong with their “study” group was a signing bonus at Biglaw, the surest path to wealth and prestige the law had to offer.