Next week, Total Attorneys is throwing a conference in Chicago. It’s not for criminal lawyers, or IP lawyers, or family lawyers, though all lawyers of these and other stripes are invited. It’s for lawyers who want to “run their practice without running themselves into the ground.” Who doesn’t? It’s the Get A Life Conference.
I remember as a young lawyer whose days were spent in court, using my evenings to meet clients, return phone calls, read mail, write motions and briefs, discuss cases and generally suck up time that might otherwise have been spent with my young family.
Contrary to popular belief, I didn’t hang out in the office because it was way more fun than being home. I wanted to enjoy time with my wife and children. I wanted to relax. I wanted a happy and fulfilling life. Who doesn’t?
The focus of the Get A Life Conference is to teach lawyers how to achieve Work-Life Balance.
At the moment, according to Total Attorneys honcho Kevin Chern, there are 110 lawyers who have paid good money to learn the secret. The number isn’t huge, but then when one considers the nature of the conference, it’s really quite amazing that 110 lawyers have chosen to spend their time and money going to this conference. After all, if they have two free days, and cash to burn, why not take a short trip to the Bahamas instead? Work-life balance and all.
The gist of the conference is marketing, judging from the agenda and speakers. I’m also not a big fan of overemphasis on lawyer marketing, a silver bullet that too many lawyers view as the lazy way to achieve success rather than through effort and skill. But some of the speakers are people I respect, such as Kevin O’Keefe and Larry Bodine, who view marketing as an adjunct to quality rather than a substitute. Others, like Alexis Martin Neeley, not so much, claiming that after she created her own million dollar practice three years out of school, she threw it away because of a calling from God to help other lawyers. For a hefty fee. I’ve asked her why she did this and she told me it was her gift. Right.
There are apparently many lawyers, mostly young, whose professional focus is the attainment of wealth while enjoying a high quality of life. So much so that they will pay money to find out how to achieve these ends. And then there are many lawyers who have turned away from the law to create businesses whose purpose is to help these lawyers to do so. Come next week, they will be in Chicago.
There are 36 people who will not be attending a conference, the purpose of which is to Get A Life. Granted, they aren’t lawyers. They will never have the chance to be lawyers. These 36 people are school aged children who have been murdered so far this school year. About one a week. In Chicago.
The juxtaposition of these two occurrences serves to make me wonder why people become lawyers these days. The cynical public perception is that lawyers are in it just for the money. These cynical people are wrong, according to the Work-Life Balance crowd. They’re in it for the money and the good life. Having carefully parsed the agenda of the Get A Life Conference, I see no workshops on how to use our education, skills, clout for the benefit of anyone else. Not clients. Not school age children in Chicago.
I don’t think that the attendees have no feelings toward the 36 school age children who were murdered in Chicago this year. I bet they feel awful for them, about the lives of innocents lost. What sort of unfeeling animal wouldn’t care? Just not enough to put aside their personal desire to make a lot of money and spend as little time doing so as possible. The latter is important enough for 110 lawyers to take two days, travel to Chicago, pay the conference fee and listen to salespeople. The former merits a “tsk” over morning coffee.
There are 36 families in Chicago at this moment who would like to get a life. Back. There are 110 lawyers coming to Chicago for something that matters a great deal to them. It’s a shame the two share nothing in common.
I remember as a young lawyer whose days were spent in court, using my evenings to meet clients, return phone calls, read mail, write motions and briefs, discuss cases and generally suck up time that might otherwise have been spent with my young family. Contrary to popular belief, I didn’t hang out in the office because it was way more fun than being home. I wanted to enjoy time with my wife and children. I wanted to relax. I wanted a happy and fulfilling life. Who doesn’t?
The focus of the Get A Life Conference is to teach lawyers how to achieve Work-Life Balance.
In this two-day conference you’ll learn how to manage all the moving parts of a successful law practice while still maintaining a life. Learn from some of the foremost experts on the subject.No, I wasn’t asked to speak at this conference. In fact, I’m probably one of the last people the participants want to hear from. I’ve been somewhat vocal about my thoughts on work-life balance. The notion is that one can have a profitable, successful law practice without sacrificing your personal life.
At the moment, according to Total Attorneys honcho Kevin Chern, there are 110 lawyers who have paid good money to learn the secret. The number isn’t huge, but then when one considers the nature of the conference, it’s really quite amazing that 110 lawyers have chosen to spend their time and money going to this conference. After all, if they have two free days, and cash to burn, why not take a short trip to the Bahamas instead? Work-life balance and all.
The gist of the conference is marketing, judging from the agenda and speakers. I’m also not a big fan of overemphasis on lawyer marketing, a silver bullet that too many lawyers view as the lazy way to achieve success rather than through effort and skill. But some of the speakers are people I respect, such as Kevin O’Keefe and Larry Bodine, who view marketing as an adjunct to quality rather than a substitute. Others, like Alexis Martin Neeley, not so much, claiming that after she created her own million dollar practice three years out of school, she threw it away because of a calling from God to help other lawyers. For a hefty fee. I’ve asked her why she did this and she told me it was her gift. Right.
There are apparently many lawyers, mostly young, whose professional focus is the attainment of wealth while enjoying a high quality of life. So much so that they will pay money to find out how to achieve these ends. And then there are many lawyers who have turned away from the law to create businesses whose purpose is to help these lawyers to do so. Come next week, they will be in Chicago.
There are 36 people who will not be attending a conference, the purpose of which is to Get A Life. Granted, they aren’t lawyers. They will never have the chance to be lawyers. These 36 people are school aged children who have been murdered so far this school year. About one a week. In Chicago.
The juxtaposition of these two occurrences serves to make me wonder why people become lawyers these days. The cynical public perception is that lawyers are in it just for the money. These cynical people are wrong, according to the Work-Life Balance crowd. They’re in it for the money and the good life. Having carefully parsed the agenda of the Get A Life Conference, I see no workshops on how to use our education, skills, clout for the benefit of anyone else. Not clients. Not school age children in Chicago.
I don’t think that the attendees have no feelings toward the 36 school age children who were murdered in Chicago this year. I bet they feel awful for them, about the lives of innocents lost. What sort of unfeeling animal wouldn’t care? Just not enough to put aside their personal desire to make a lot of money and spend as little time doing so as possible. The latter is important enough for 110 lawyers to take two days, travel to Chicago, pay the conference fee and listen to salespeople. The former merits a “tsk” over morning coffee.
There are 36 families in Chicago at this moment who would like to get a life. Back. There are 110 lawyers coming to Chicago for something that matters a great deal to them. It’s a shame the two share nothing in common.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I don’t totally disagree with the premise of the conference Scott, but I too came from the the school of hard knocks.
I believe you worked your ass off to acheive the things you sought. Plus I’m not all that smart. Persistence & dillegence were all I had to keep up with kids in law school, practicing law for 17 years, and running companies for the last 10.
What I’ll bring as a presenter at the conference is the message that when you’re out working 6 or 7 days a week like I do make dam sure you’re doing what you like. Do the legal work you’d like to do for the clients you’d like to work for. It’s not going to happen overnight – took me about 10 years to get there.
There’s way to many lawyers busting their asses that enjoy about 10% of what they do. Without leaving the practice, there are ways to reinvent yourself so long as you’re practical in your approach. With the net, some common sense, & some humility, a lawyer can do that a lot faster than the 10 years it took me.
Keep hammering your stuff out. Though I haven’t been as active blogging the last month or so, I’m still reading your stuff.
Wouldn’t working for those who really need our services and can’t afford them, or getting involved in community issues and initiatives, be exactly the sort of thing we could all choose to do more of if our work lives didn’t consume so many hours and so much of our energy?
Oh, Tiff, that’s exactly how it would be. With beautiful unicorns, and painted ponies.
Scott:
Wow! This blog entry reminds me of a guy who emailed me to tell me that they thought my website was crap. He actually took the time out of his day to let me know what he thought.
I was fine with his comment. I realized that he was not the type of person who I would ever want as a client in the first place.
What I fail to see regarding your blog entry is the connection between people attending the conference (which I did) and crime in Chicago.
Did you track down the stats on crime in the Bahamas? Or NYC for that matter. You’re spending your days in New York…what have you done to curb the crime rate out there?
At the end of the day I do what I do so that I can house, feed, clothe and educate my children. If there is anything left over it goes to my church, my living-on-a-fixed-income Dad, and my charitible project – ending animal cruelty.
But if I am a miserable prick at the end of the day, who have I served? My wife and kids, who have to put up with me? My clients? Who?
The conference was about alot of things. Amongst them was the fact that at the end of the day, we all face the same challenges and demands.
There is no “tsk” needed whatsoever. I came back from the conference recharged and invigorated with new friends, new colleagues and new ideas. Each of these things will carry over to bringing additional joy to my family and additional skills to my clients.
And maybe, just maybe, the tens of thousands of dollars that we left behind in Chicago last week will help put one more police officer or firefighter on the streets. Maybe.
If not, perhaps at next year’s conference there will be 220 people who attend and we can double the amount of money that we leave behind. If you would like to be one of them, it’s my treat.
Dreams and aspirations of contributions to be made in the future are always inspirational. I got the report back from the All About Me Conference. I hear that it was all about how to market oneself into big money while doing as little work as possible. It sounds like the perfect image of a modern lawyer.
There was no connection between the conference and deaths of children in Chicago, aside from the juxtaposition of lawyers whose concern was their free time and a world that has problems that have nothing to do with their work-life balance. You can explain your focus any way you want. It’s all about you. That’s who you are, and that’s fine if that’s who you want to be. But don’t BS yourself or anyone else; It’s all about you.
Don’t you do pro bono work, Scott? I know I did. Don’t you donate more money to good causes when you have more money to spare? I know I do. Don’t you spend more time volunteering and helping out other people when you aren’t stretched as thin? I know I do.
Absolutely Tiff. The only reason you go to the Get a Life Conference is to become even a greater humanitarian than you already are. It’s not about that yucky work-life balance stuff that those losers care about. You’re different. You’re special.
The only reason? Probably not. Did someone suggest that it was the only reason? We’re lawyers, right? So some basic application of logical principles should apply here. You seemed to suggest in your first post that wanting to find work/life balance and make more money was somehow inconsistent with any sense of social justice or concern. I demonstrated, to the contrary, that finding more uncommitted hours in your day and more uncommitted dollars in your wallet could in fact benefit the very things you claimed they were at odds with. So…you changed gears completely, and introduced the new standard that appears to suggest that no endeavor is worthwhile unless 100% of the participants are 100% motivated by altruism? That’s a tough standard. Seems unlikely you’ll find any event anywhere in the world that lives up to it. Maybe there’s something to that whole “balance” thing…
So you’d say, for instance, that an attorney wanting to be available to his family is “all about me”? Purely selfish to want to actually show up and raise the kids you brought into the world?
Oy Tiff, that’s not logic. That’s childish wishfulness. If you want to argue that the end goal of work-life balance is to have more time for pro bono and more money for charitable causes, then you’ve reduced yourself to a joke, and that’s how you were treated.
What you conveniently ignore is that the work-life balance movement is about doing the least amount of work for the most amount of money so you be able to enjoy your life without nasty work or responsibility getting in the way. If you don’t like being treated like a joke, then grow up and deal with the truth. Tell me that you are fully prepared to drop your clients so that you can be home with the kids or go out with your friends whenever you feel like it, without the responsiblity of those nasty clients or that nasty partner getting in your way. Be honest and I’ll deal with honesty. Be a child and you’re treated like a child.
Now you’re getting the idea. An attorney’s responsibility is to her clients. If you want to be there for your kids, be a barrista. You don’t get to be an attorney while picking and choosing when it’s convenient for you.
Actually, Scott, that’s exactly what I did fourteen years ago. Since I earned more than twice as much money as my husband did, we lost more than 2/3 of our income when I opted to stay home and raise my child and later my two stepchildren. It wasn’t always easy–at one point, our car needed replacing and that was totally unrealistic. My husband rode his bike to work for four months. Sadly, this happened in November, in the midwest. It was a tough time.
It was a choice we made because it was best for our family; if I could have earned a great income and still been there for the kids, you bet your ass I would have done it. At that time, it either wasn’t workable or I didn’t know how to make it work. Rightly or wrongly, I felt that I had to choose.
I think THAT’S the point of this kind of event: you DON’T have to choose between being an active participant in your family/community and earning a decent living.
Are there greedy people in the world? Of course. Are there people who will use those principles for nothing other than personal profit? Sure. I guess that’s a choice, too. Which is the whole point: none of us should feel painted into a corner and like we don’t have options available to us or control over our lives and careers–and far too many attorneys I know feel exactly that.
Life is full of choices. Each a choice has consequences. Including work/life balance. You want to believe, so you close your eyes and listen to work/life balance gurus tell you what you want to hear. You are willing to take the chance with someone else’s life and pray nothing bad comes of it, or you pretend that bad things couldn’t possibly happen because you don’t want to believe. So you go to conferences to sing in the choir and believe with all your heart that there is a magic bullet that gives you everything you heart desires. But you know it’s a lie, and pray it doesn’t all come crashing down on you.
Maybe you’ll get away with it. Some do. For most, it eventually catches up and then you will pay for the choices.
Scott, you’ve changed the subject yet again. That seems to happen every time someone raises a point and you have no response. What relevance does your quote about finding employment have to a conference aimed at sole practitioners and small-firm attorneys who are self-employed?
You’re just a tad literal, aren’t you. Okay, since you have some difficulty applying concepts, allow me to be your sign language interpreter. We all work for someone, whether it’s the partner at a firm or the client who foots the bill. If the clients are happy with you going home at 5 (this is an example, so don’t get your panties in a twist) and are prepared to suffer the consequences for your being off doing family stuff when they need you, that’s great. If they don’t want to retain you because you may or may not be there for them, that’s their choice. If they hire you and you drop the ball and miss a deadline, or fail to appear, or whatever, and the clients is harmed, then you live with the malpractice suit and the knowledge that as wonderful a mother as you may be, you failed as a lawyer and there is no one to blame but yourself.
You traded your professional integrity for family fun time. If that’s who you are, and your clients are fine with that, then you’ve found your niche.
Surely you can’t be entirely oblivious to concepts like limiting your commitments to what you can handle in a quality manner in the time you’re willing to invest, or hiring the right people to whom you can delegate time-consuming tasks with confidence?
If you sincerely believe that only through complete sacrifice of your professional life can you do a respectable job and provide your clients quality service, it sounds like you’re exactly the kind of person this conference was designed for.
So you’re back to unicorns and painted ponies. Sorry, but not interested in discussing your fantasies.
Next, I’m the antithesis of the person this conference was designed for: I have no complaints whatsoever, have a great family life and never, but never, sacrifice my clients. Forget Get a Life. Try Get a Pair. If you don’t like the responsibility that comes with being a lawyer, do something else. But for God’s sake, stop whining about it.
As I already mentioned, I DID long ago decide to “do something else” and haven’t practiced law since 1995–but I’m all for people who want to practice law and find time to have personal lives as well doing so.
What’s really puzzling is why you’re not. If you “have a great family life” and “never sacrifice your clients” then it sounds like you’ve already achieved that balance all on your own. Why would you be so resentful of others finding it, too?
I’m not resentful in the least. In fact, your characterizing it that way demonstrates the egocentricity of your thinking; that it’s all about you be denied the wonderful life you want to enjoy.
I am, on the other hand, disgusted by the dminution of the integrity, duty, responsibility of lawyers who place their self-interest ahead of their obligation to serve their clients. I’m similarly disgusted by lawyers who lie, cheat and steal. Law is not a job. It’s a profession. If you don’t want to fulfill your oath and your duty to your clients, than find an occupation more suited to your priorities. Law isn’t it.
And before you respond, getting a law degree and passing the bar doesn’t entitle you to be a lawyer in whatever fashion you chose. Neither you nor anyone else gets to reinvent the responsibility that goes with being a professional to suit your needs, desires or priorities. Sorry that you spent your time getting a law degree, but if being a lawyer doesn’t suit you, then find something else to do.
As I’ve explained twice now, I “found something else to do” many years ago that I’m very happy with. Many other attorneys have done the same. What I don’t understand is why you equate “showing up to your kid’s school play” with “not fulfi8ling your oath and your duty to your clients”. You seem to suggest over and over again that it’s not possible to do both, but then claim that you do both yourself. There are a lot of bad lawyers in the world (as there are bad doctors and bad painters and bad waitresses) and I share your disgust with those who sacrifice their clients’ interests for their own personal gain. I just can’t understand why you think that’s a necessary component of finding balance–especially since you claim to have balance in your own life.
Of course, the same goes for parenting–so can we assume that you consider it unethical for attorneys to have children?
And I’ve understood it both times you explained it. The difficulty your having reflects you inability to appreciate that life involves choices, and you believe yourself entitled to a life that involves two conflicting choices. I would say that perhaps some day you will grasp what you can’t see now, but it’s unlikely to be the case. You will always find a way to rationalize why your presonal life should trump your professional responsibility. Like I said before, it’s all about choices. Going to a conference called “Get a Life” tells a great deal about yours. You didn’t go to a conference called “How to better serve your clients” or “How to be a better lawyer.”
I think this discussion has played itself out.
And back to silly arguments. You might want to seriously reconsider whether you’re cut out to return to the practice of law.
Did I say something about having gone to a conference? Or have you based all of your assumptions in this discussion on one big one that you made at the very beginning?
I did assume so, given that this was a blog post about the Get a Life Conference. But if my assumption was inaccurate, it doesn’t change my views on the work/life balance movement. And if you aren’t an adherent of that movement, then it would apply with equal force to the statements you’ve posted here.