Q&A with Andra Greene, co-chair of the ABA Section of Litigation's Raise the Bar project

"How can law firms continue to be profitable while at the same time providing lawyers with happier, more satisfying lives?" That is the question posed by Brad Brian, chair of the ABA Section of Litigation, as the basis of discussion for the section's Raise the Bar project.

Developed in recognition of the growing trend of lawyer dissatisfaction in the profession, the project is seeking to move beyond just discussing the problem. It wants to come up with solutions. YourABA recently spoke with Andra Greene, a partner in the Newport Beach, Calif., law firm Irell & Manella LLP and one of the co-chairs appointed by Brian to the Raise the Bar project to help develop those solutions.

Q: What led you and the Section to adopt the Raise the Bar initiative?

Andra Greene

It really began as a cornerstone project for [Litigation Section Chair] Brad Brian. He began the project when he was chair-elect. He and others recognized that there is a lot of dissatisfaction in the profession, particularly among lawyers who practice in large law firms – something like 75 percent of lawyers surveyed said they wouldn't want their children to become lawyers because of the increased pressures and related issues. And Brad wanted to see what could be done about it. His initial premise was that this was really a generational issue, that people looked at the profession differently depending on the number of years they had practiced. He thought that there was a generational gap.

Brad appointed a working group of some leaders of the Section of Litigation, myself included, to test some of these hypotheses. We ran two focus groups in Atlanta, at the ABA Annual Meeting. What we learned was very interesting. Lawyers of different age cohorts identified the same problems. They might have differing reasons as to why the problems existed, but everybody saw the same issues and challenges. So Brad and the working group together decided to see if we could do something that went beyond simply griping about the problems – because everybody is very good at that – and go the next step to see if we could explore solutions. That is what led to the development of Raise the Bar. The name changed from Bridging the Generational Gap to Raise the Bar. Because it really wasn't a generational gap.

Q: What kinds of projects has the initiative undertaken?

The first thing we developed was a colloquium where we invited lawyers in varying age categories. We called them the following: "seasoned lawyers," who are lawyers 50 and over; "sandwich lawyers," who are partners in law firms and who are in the 40-50 year age range; and the younger lawyers who have been in practice with firms three to seven years at firms but who were not partners.

We invited people from all over the country – including very senior managing partners, in-house counsel, members of the media and management consultants – to a symposium in Chicago that occurred in May 2005. The idea was that, with the help of trained facilitators, we harness this brain power and brainstorm possible solutions and paths to follow. We could then take that wisdom and move it forward.

We did that, and it was an incredible experience. I was there for the two days of the colloquium. The energy was palpable and people were very excited. We came up with ideas to explore. After the colloquium, we confirmed the consensus reached at two subsequent regional meetings, one in New York and one in San Francisco. The regional meetings were one-day symposia with people from the local firms to see if there were regional differences and to see how the participants responded to some of the ideas we were considering.

What we have been looking at are ways that law firms can measure the quality of life at their firm. We call that the Great Law Firm Project, and that is being worked on right now. We are also working on a toolkit of best practices, because one thing that has come out of the symposia is that many law firms are doing different kinds of things to address the issues that everybody recognizes are facing the profession. And there's not anything collected that allows people to get access to creative ideas, so we're working on that.

We are also presenting a resolution to the ABA House of Delegates about the idea that lawyers should have compensation systems that recognize not simply billable hours, but other contributions to the profession and to the fabric of a law firm. That resolution will be presented at this Annual Meeting.

We're working on a book that will have a series of essays about these issues and possible solutions. The book is in progress as we speak, so we've been very busy.

Q: In this dog-eat-dog, 24/7 world, how can law firms be profitable and still help to enable lawyers to lead happier, more satisfying lives?

Well, we've learned about things that matter to people and that can help. Number one, a law firm needs to have the ability to be flexible and to recognize the competing demands that people have on their time. That is not to say that people no longer have to bill any hours or do client work – we're in the business of serving clients. But there are ways that, through – for example – attention on development of lawyers, law firms can make the work environment a better one. We have found that young lawyers are willing to work as hard as lawyers of other generations have been, but that the opportunities they have are not necessarily the same given the nature of practice. And if law firms make a point of giving meaningful development opportunities, it goes a long way toward making a satisfying career.

Spending time mentoring and making people feel that the law firm has an interest in their career – all that goes a very long way. Rewarding behaviors other than simply billing hours; a compensation system that is transparent. In other words, people understand what is rewarded. All of those things help.

Certainly law firms need to be profitable, they're not going to cease being profitable, but the opportunities are there to combine a more satisfying experience for lawyers in the firm with profitability for the firm. And in fact, the case may be made that a law firm will be more profitable if its lawyers are satisfied with their careers and hence more productive. And if you can lessen attrition, that certainly increases profitability.

Q: What changes have you helped to put into place in your own law firm in light of Raise the Bar?

I certainly implemented changes in my own habits. I am a member of my firm's executive committee, and to the extent that issues come up within our firm I've drawn on the wisdom I've gained from Raise the Bar and am very vocal about it. Fortunately, my firm has been very receptive because we want our firm to be a place where people want to come and stay and that's in everybody's interest.

What I have found in my own law firm is that everyone in management realizes the challenges facing law firms today and are seriously interested in solutions for them. So people are, quite frankly, very happy that I am doing this project. We get a benefit out of it.

What have I done myself? I've looked for opportunities to help the younger lawyers develop – in their experience, in writing, whatever it happens to be, I make a point of being sure to give feedback. I'm much more mindful of it. I've always considered myself to do these things, but now I really go through a mental checklist, 'O.K., someone's assisting me on a case. Am I really making sure they get opportunities – about the motion they argued, did I go with them to given them live feedback?,' that sort of thing.

Q: Is it reasonable to expect large and small firms to be able to adopt the same policies?

I don't know that it's reasonable for them to adopt identical policies. I think they both face many of the same issues, and the general principles still apply.

How do the generational differences play out? You've said there are similar problems but that they show themselves in somewhat different ways depending on whether someone is a seasoned lawyer, versus the sandwich lawyer and the younger lawyer?

Absolutely. What the Raise the Bar project has pointed out to me and to my colleagues involved in it is that as lawyers of different generations approach dealing with the problems and looking for solutions, they need to be mindful of how the experience of lawyers of different generations varies.

Let me give you a concrete example. I consider myself a "sandwich lawyer," based on my age and level of experience. When I started the practice of law, it was pretty much a given that if you did good work and stayed at a firm a certain amount of time, you'd make partner. That is simply not the case at most large law firms today. So that colors the experience of most junior lawyers because they just don't have the same expectations, because that's the way the world is. And so, as you think about giving people more opportunities to develop as lawyers, you have to remember that's the world they live in. That it's simply not enough that they're there. They're looking at a firm that they may only be there for three to five years because that's the experience of most of their cohorts.

Another example is that, 25 years ago, larger law firms handled more smaller cases that gave junior lawyers like myself an opportunity to get into court and try cases. That's not as common now. So there's a great deal of satisfaction in getting early responsibility, getting into court, doing those sorts of things. So senior lawyers need to be mindful of ways to get younger lawyers those types of experiences.

Q: How do you see these policies being implemented more broadly?

In addition to the book, another way to spread the word is when we roll out the best practices guide. Educating law firms about ways to be successful in addressing the challenges they face is going to be more important. As the word spreads, people will get on the bandwagon because it makes sense. If people are happier at their jobs, they're going to do a better job for the client and within the firm. There really is a business case to be made for it.

In addition to these and the resolution before the House, it wouldn't surprise me if more projects came up. The people who are involved in this are very excited about it.

It's very easy to sit around and complain about it and bemoan the fate of the practice of law. But it's even more exciting to talk about how things can be different.

And we welcome the aid of all ABA members, indeed all members of the legal profession, and there are many ways that people who are interested can help. If they wish to, we look forward to having them join our campaign. People can find more on the Section's Web site.

Back to top