Stephen Allen

The death of the billable hour is a subject close to Stephen Allen's heart. Currently Director of Innovation (I want that job title!) at Berwin Leighton Paisner, formerly both a Chief Executive at leading barrister chambers 7 Bedford Row and prior to that Group Company Secretary at Orange broadband services, Stephen has a particularly well-informed perspective on the topic of what in-house lawyers want and how private practice firms should go about providing it. Always one to engage attention with an intriguingly-turned phrase, Stephen came in to talk to the Kysen team this week about "The Value Paradox": how in-house lawyers are undoubtedly tired of the hourly rate as a way to measure the value that private practice lawyers provide; yet the reality is they find it hard to measure value in any different way.

"I have a story for you, a parallel with Lady Windermere's Fan", he told us, "the famous Oscar Wilde play staring Lord Darlington, the man who knew the price of everything and the value of nothing. Imagine this scenario: a head of legal at a FTSE 100 firm invites two firms to give a piece of mission-critical legal advice. The first firm, Erlynne & Co, costs the job on the basis of research and drafting time, delivering an estimate of 70,000 pounds for the work. The client negotiates this down to 50,000 pounds. The firm then takes three weeks to deliver a 150-page report, of which the executive summary contains all the client needs. They tell the client 70,000 pounds worth of time was spend on the work, but finally agree to stick to the negotiated 50,000 pound charge. The client is happy, feeling they received real value for money.

"The second firm, Augustus Lorton, offers straight away to do the job at a flat fee of 50,000 pounds and the next morning delivers the equivalent of the exec summary, (the only bit the client actually valued in Scenario One), in a half page email. The client balks at paying 50,000 pounds for such a quick-turnaround job.

"The moral of the tale? Despite the rhetoric about wanting a change from hourly rates, a typical in-house legal client often finds it hard to see value in the way the job was handled in Scenario Two, despite them getting the bit they said they valued so much - and getting it sooner. This is what I call The Value Paradox.

"The message really is that it's the job of the private practice firms both to find a new pricing model and lead the client in understanding where the value is."

In his role at BLP Stephen has been working hard - indeed innovating - to find new models that get to the heart of how in-house lawyers want to work differently and in a way that works for his firm too. Take a look here for details on BLP's ground breaking deal with Thames Water, where they bought out the in-house legal team in a five year deal to deliver legal services to the company through the former in-house team, through BLP's own team and via subcontracted firms Ashfords and Pannone.

"A triage system is key to the success of how this project is managed, with the emphasis on accurate diagnosis of what skills a particular piece of legal work requires, followed by an astute assessment of who in our collective team does what best - and how to divvy up tasks for maximum benefit to the client and to the various firms involved. We're looking for a "win: win: win" for all the parties involved," says Stephen.

Remember the Orange slogan? "The future's bright - the future's orange"? I've always thought Stephen brought a little bit of that bright future to the profession, when he arrived from his in-house role at the telecoms company. Now of course, since its merger with T-Mobile, the merged company "Everything Everywhere" has a new slogan: 
                            
                                          "I am who I am because of everyone."

Maybe there's a point here for the profession, about collaborating to win ...

***

There was something strangely familiar about this week's stories of celebrities and tax avoidance schemes: a memory nagging at the back of my brain - investment in high risk creative projects, (film, music)? With the idea that the inevitable losses can be offset against tax on other income? Then I remembered it's pretty much the plot of Mel Brooks' excellent satirical dark comedy The Producers.

The Story focuses around a desperate washed-up Broadway producer and his accountant and a play they design to be a flop - to avoid the scrutiny of the Revenue  and oversold to investors 250-fold in the confidence they'll never have to pay out (so in fact part Ponzi scheme). You'd think that "Springtime for Hitler: A Gay Romp with Adolf and Eva at Berchtesgaden" couldn't fail to fail, so to speak. Especially with its Busby Berkley style geometric choreography with aerial shots of dancers in swastika formation. But it turns out to be a surprise hit and panic then ensues as its creators are expected to pay out to their investors. 

The 1968 film won an academy award for its screenplay and is preserved in the National US Film Registry. It is one of the maddest satires of antisemitism you'll find. Delicious for this. If you haven't seen it, take a look - the 1968 film is much better than the remake or stage play. 

Of course on the subject of life imitating art Jimmy Carr went one better. Check out this Youtube clip of a Carr routine where he lambasts greedy tax avoiders. First rule of reputation management anybody? That's right: it begins with the words 'people in glass houses ...'

***

Thank you to my twitter companions who kept me entertained on a broken down train on Tuesday evening. To stave of frustration and boredom I put out a plea on Twitter (a "twea"?) for any good jokes or other interesting distractions. I was inspired by the response. 

@legaltwo kicked it off with: "Did you hear the one about the law firm that embraced technology and client focus? No, me neither ... boom boom :-)". Made me smile out loud and we went on from there. 

(I hope it goes without saying that my clients and many of my friends in the legal world, being connected with such new-fangled concepts as PR, are by definition among the early adopters, in the vanguard, the exceptions that prove the rule.)

On seeing @legaltwo's offering @Louise_Restell tweeted me her latest blog post, which touches on this subject of lawyers embracing technology (or rather not). She makes an interesting point that there is a clear need for an official and independent legal advice and guidance site - similar to NHS Direct Online she suggests. The Legal Services Board found in a recent report that "the internet revolution has yet to reach legal services" (what a quote!) and this is making it almost impossible for consumers to find accurate and helpful legal information when they are looking for support. They are swamped by information and just can't see the wood for the trees. Our friends at Prolegal tell me they are exploring a legal diagnostics site. It would be interesting if they could be persuaded to share this for the benefit of all. Watch this space ...

Thanks for the company @Legaltwo, @Tucola, @aahafezi (who was the one person to urge me just to live in the moment and enjoy observing the lovely evening through the train window) @RupertWhite, @Louise_Restell, @HeatherTowns, @MEkowalski, @LexFuturus, @allaboutcosts. You were there when I needed you!

Keir Starmer

"Starmer struck" is how I would best describe the two teenage girls who came with me to see a talk by the Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer at this month's Hay Literary Festival. Apparently he has a "firm judging chin". He is certainly an excellent communicator, putting across quite nuanced legal and ethical points in language so simple and clear that nothing was lost on my 14 year-olds companions. They told me afterwards, with starry eyes, that they felt 'very reassured knowing our justice system was in the hands of such a capable man'! 

For me? I was particularly struck with his views on the importance of transparency in public office and the work he has done to build what he describes as a 'virtual glass wall' around his department. Whereas his predecessors tended to the view they shouldn't have to justify their decisions and that the public should trust them to use their discretion wisely and get things right, Keir believes this is no longer a tenable position in an age where the public has seen such lack of integrity among so many public office holders, first with MPs and expenses, and now Leveson bringing disrepute on politicians, police and press alike.

"Discretion can be a force for good, certainly. But it can also hide incompetence - or even corruption' he says 'and in my mind this means we must be transparent: issuing guidelines explaining our general approach to an area, be it assisted suicide, phone-hacking, whatever. Then be transparent about what we decide in each case. We are making important decisions that have very significant impacts for individuals, for families, victims, witnesses. We owe it to them to be open about how we arrive at these life-changing decisions."

He also told a wonderful tale of the case of the DDP impersonator. Definitely a case he had to stay at arm's length from; he didn't even want to be privy to who in his department was handling it. The doppelgänger was Paul Bint, a con man who posed as rich or important men to win the affections of women. One of his girlfriends gave witness for the prosecution. Her suspicions about her new boyfriend began when she realised she had never seen any one of the three expensive cars her lover bragged about and he was always cadging lifts from her. The clincher came when they had a row one evening and as he left in fury he sprawled the word 'Bitch' over her garden fence "which didn't seem something the DPP would do" she said in the witness box. Quite. 

When the time came for the trial, Keir did just have three questions for his colleagues: "Is the man pleading 'Not Guilty'? If he is, what's his defence - is he saying he really is me? And in that case, what happens to me if he is acquitted?" Luckily for everyone concerned, Brint was found guilty of fraud and put away. My teenage friends can rest knowing we still have the right man in role for this very important job.
***

So what do we think of Danny Boyle's Green and Pleasant Land? I always knew we could expect something imaginative, ambitious and memorable from the top film-maker and theatre director, his medium being such a high-impact visual one. And as his plans to transform the Olympic stadium into "the British countryside" were unveiled this week, my heart did stop for a moment - although I'm not entirely sure it was all for positive reasons. The pastoral scene is to include three live sheepdogs, 10 chickens, 12 horses and 70 sheep to create "a picture of ourselves as a nation" we are told. So far, I can't say this particularly resonates with my own sense of what's great about England - don't know about you... 

But then he came to his "mosh pit" under the fake Glastonbury Tor, filled with real people - members of the public representing the masses; his "posh pit" at the other end representing the first-night-of-the-prom-goers - and his hopes the two groups might "do battle and face each other off" on the night. Now that's more like the England I know. Like it. And the model includes four big suspended clouds which are capable of producing rain, "just in case we don't have enough." Well thanks for that, Danny. Thoughtful.

But then more excitement later in the week as we learn that this "rural idyll" theme is to be just one of several segments, each sequence to burst through the previous.  According to the Guardian "the countryside side set was a feint, inducing critics into taking it at face value...thus to make the eventual spectacle more shocking".  Now that's more like the Danny Boyle we know and love. 

***

Last chance to see... The BBC's Chief Economics Correspondent reminded us at a Gorkana Media Briefing at Mayer Brown this week that as the TV team moves out of the historic Television Centre in White City to join radio colleagues at Broadcasting House in Central London's Portland Place, and the BBC ceases broadcasting from its iconic headquarters altogether, 50 years of TV history comes to a close. Television Centre was built in the 1950s and officially opened in 1960. It is synonymous with an age of broadcasting that brought us Play School, Blue Peter, Top of The Pops, the original Dr Who, Fawlty Towers and countless other programmes that are now part of out collective cultural mind map. 

Feeling nostalgic? Take a look at this video and write up for a recent documentary on Television Centre that the Guardian's Michael Pilgrim described as 'a leaving do for a building'. Hankies at the ready... 

Elizabeth Ferguson

How well do lawyers deal with uncertainty?  An interesting question raised by Elizabeth Ferguson of change management consultants Crelos at a very thought-provoking panel discussion they hosted last week.  The event formed part of the consultancy’s Change Mastery Series, focussed particularly on the professions and designed to drive debate on the latest theories, models, tools and techniques of change.  Well of course the legal profession needs all the help it can get in this area, given that lawyers at every level of the market and across all disciplines (barristers as well as solicitors) are facing more change now than at any other time previously.

We are all familiar with the maxim that in today’s business world "change is constant", ie that a state of change is no longer an exceptional event, but the norm.  Crelos even talk about the issue of "change fatigue", how people are becoming dulled to the idea of change as the stimulus is so constant, and how this can get in the way of innovation if not addressed.  But in the legal profession we are experiencing change not only in this sense of continual evolution, but also as "revolution" as well, following deregulation in the form of The Legal Services Act which now allows legal services to be delivered by Alternative Business Structures, paving the way for  all manner of creative alternatives to the traditional partnership structure or classic barrister offering. Indeed new weird and wonderful ABSs seem to be popping up almost on a weekly basis: we now have our first listed law firm in the UK after the merging of English stalwart Russell Jones & Walker and Australian firm Slater & Gordon; and I recently blogged about the astonishing news that haulage company Eddie Stobart is getting in to the business of law; and last week’s big ABS news was that newly launched fixed-price legal offering Riverview Law is opening in New York.  

Elizabeth shared with us some conclusions drawn from recent research interviews she has conducted among senior executives in professional services firms.  She began with the observation that many professional firms remain steeped in history and tradition, working within a culture that emphasises cooperation and a collegiate approach which has many advantages, but which is not generally helpful in promoting dynamism and transformation at pace, she says.  

"The professions contain some of the most intelligent high achievers in the world of business.  So why do they find change so difficult?  The short answer is, because they are made up of human beings.  Managing change is about far more than just changing structures: the real difference between failure and success is most often the extent to which you are able to change behaviours, ie get people to think and do things differently.  And that is inherently difficult; as famed organisational psychologist Elliott Jaques put it so eloquently, "It is precisely the uncertainty inherent in human work, the feeling of never being quite sure, that makes you close your eyes and agonise over decisions".  And this is why even the most intelligent people will balk at change, preferring to stay in denial, resist, put up walls, etc.   Another main barrier is of course "group think", that classic feature of group behaviour where individuals’ desire for harmony within the group holds them back from properly challenging each other’s ideas and realistically assessing alternatives.  If I have one message for the professions, it is to have confidence in your abilities to deal with change; you do have many of the tools: you have particularly strong skill sets in analysing data, weighing up evidence and coming to judgements. The challenge is to be brave in applying all this when it comes to your own business and your own individual position in a fast-changing market - and to know when to bring in help from the experts with some of the softer skills challenges!"

For more detail on Elizabeth’s research of business leaders in professional firms and how they see the impact of the changing regulatory and economic climate on their businesses, click here. 

***

It's good to be reminded there's still heroism in journalism, particularly at a time when the Leveson Inquiry has brought the reputation of the media to an all-time low. Attending the Amnesty Media Awards made me think about the power of the media in a whole new light. In contrast to the jaded view of the press we are inevitably left with, watching the sordid detail of dodgy press practices that emerge through the inquiry process, the journalists celebrated in these Awards all have a strong conscience and are driven by impulses you could be forgiven for thinking were outmoded in our cynical media age: the relentless pursuit of truth; the need to tell the stories that oppressive regimes are trying to hide. And some of these journalist will risk even life and limb in this pursuit. 

Sunday Times war correspondent Marie Colvin, whom I blogged about earlier this year (26 Feb 2012 see second story) after her death by shellfire in Syria, received a posthumous award. It was collected on her behalf by her photographer colleague Paul Conroy who was wounded in the same attack that claimed her life. He limped on to the stage to collect the award on crutches and with various wires and tubes peering out from under his clothing and joked how Marie's 'infectious bravery' hadn't been such good news for him, particularly from his family's point of view.

For more information on the Awards, check out the live tweets from the event. 

***

This week I've been at the Hay Literary Festival on the Welsh/English border, enjoying a wide range of speakers from  the world of books, screenwriting and music. For many years Hay was sponsored by The Guardian but these days it's supported by the Telegraph. Before I headed off for the festival a chum from the Sunday Telegraph told me over lunch that the atmosphere was rather tense the first year the Telegraph took over, a good number of literary professionals and stars even choosing to boycott their party they were so upset The Guardian had been usurped. The Guardian readership must surely be the largest represented at Hay of all the broadsheets after all. (Me? I'm not particular of course, having a professional interest in reading across all the nationals every day and favouring the different titles for different types of coverage.) I understand relations are rather better now and everyone is only too appreciative of the Telegraph's generous continuing support of the arts in these austere times. 

The hottest ticket? Hard to choose, but in my view it was 'legendary punk poet and King of the performance stage' John Cooper Clarke. Tickets sold out very quickly but we booked ours early (*smug*).  He didn't disappoint. There was lots more to enjoy. If you're interested, you can check out the lineup here.

Simon Harper

Lawyers On Demand (LOD)'s Simon Harper likes dreaming up new ways for lawyers to find fulfilment at work. In the week that this award-winning alternative legal resourcing business announced plans to spin out from its parent Berwin Leighton Paisner and become independent, he spoke to us about his thoughts on how different lawyers' lives can be when they are brave enough to go after what they really want in life. We're all familiar with the story of how far the legal profession lags behind most other business sectors when it comes to promoting work/life balance and flexible working. Images of in-house restaurants, delicatessens, supermarkets, GP centres of even sleeping pods spring to mind as some of the more memorable examples of the lengths some firms go to to convince employees they don't actually ever need to leave the office. A couple of shocking suicides in the profession a few years ago galvanised change and today at least the rhetoric is that work/life balance is a good thing. Magic Circle firm Allen & Overy for example now has a Parents@A&O and a Carers@A&O initiative. But LOD take this to a whole new level, offering market-leading lawyers the opportunity to continue working at the top of their game, (for such mouthwatering clients as Financial Times, Gucci, Orange, BSkyB), but also having time to pursue other demanding interests in their lives. Some of the lawyers in their team are balancing work with raising a family, although this makes up a surprisingly small proportion of LODers. More are pursuing personal interests such as writing novels, teaching yoga - one is even a vicar!

When I asked Simon this week why he thought LOD had been so successful since its launch in 2008 (they have grown in turnover from 0-7 million pounds, and in freelance lawyer numbers from a pilot of 8 to a team of over 100) he talked about its universal appeal:
'One of the first lawyers to join our freelance pool, Sameera Khan, describes her moment of epiphany, on a Sicilian beach asking herself 'Surely my career should offer me more than this?' A classic 'Is this it?' moment that nearly everyone can  relate to. It takes a combination of reflection  and action' he says 'to make a change. It's something I can get quite evangelical about: I want to encourage people to really go for it, to push the boundaries and really strive to work in a way that gives them autonomy and fulfilment. The workplace is opening up now to new ways of doing things - perhaps one of the positives that's come out of this economic crisis, necessity being the Mother of Invention as they say. I love Roman Krznaric's idea' [the author of 'How to Find Fulfilling Work' which, by the way, tells the story of Sameera Khan as a case study] 'that to find fulfilment we should aim to be wide-achievers rather than high-achievers.'

Sameera for example enjoyed being able to combine a career with LOD as an investment funds lawyer, on an LOD assignment in the wealth management legal team at Coutts & Co, with her social entrepreneurial side developing a community hub in her native Brighton for the exchange of creative ideas and skills over tea and cake.

LOD's spin out from BLP has been designed to give the fledgling business 'more oxygen' as Simon and co-founder Jonathan Brenner have big ambitions for the future. The ongoing relationship with BLP remains key (they will be a major stakeholder in the spun out business) as the backing of this strong international brand has been a major factor in LOD's success to date. But the founders' excitement in being free to take the business in the direction they want as fast as they want, is palpable. From working closely with them in recent months we know how energised and tireless they are, regularly working around the clock and at weekends. Of course there's an irony here: work/life balance anyone?
***

An interesting week in the world of social media.  This last week or so must have been an emotional rollercoaster for Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, even for someone so famously dispassionate: first the long-awaited 100 billion dollar Facebook flotation, then his wedding to long-time girlfriend Priscilla Chan (would love to see the size of that prenup!), followed only days later by the disastrous news that he is to be sued (along with the investment banks involved) for misleading smaller investors by concealing falling revenue growth forecasts. Apparently the Facebook IPO has registered more 'pokes' than 'likes' on its own social media platform. 

And all this in a week that saw a fascinating revelation that the world's leading CEOs now consider social media as important as face-to-face communication.  Also a week in which the eminently conservative and secretive investment bank Goldman Sachs started tweeting.  Apparently this move to embrace social media is part of a new vision for a more 'open and friendly' Goldman Sachs, after a run of negative media coverage following an ex-employee's expose of an internal culture of greed and widespread disrespect for clients. New PR Supremo Jake Siewart, hired this March to turn the bank's image around, was PR advisor to the Clinton White House so knows a thing or to about handling difficult news.  You can follow their tweets here.  

***

Great excitement at the re-opening of Leicester Square this week.  As such close neighbours to 'Premiere Square', and being in the business of PR, we felt duty bound to test out the ambiance of this famous London landmark after its 15 million pound makeover and report back to you.  So we decided to have 'team beers' at a pavement cafe after close of business on Friday (Yes, we did it for you!)  And we had such perfect weather for it!

So what did we think?  Well, some of us couldn't remember what the Square looked like before the makeover, it's been shrouded in builders hoardings for so long! But we very much liked the posh new granite paving, the arty stainless steel railings, the fancy water feature around the Shakespeare statue. And we all felt that whereas before the Square used to feel quite dowdy and rather forgotten, now it is bright and proud - far more in keeping with its international reputation as the stage for red carpet UK film premieres.  And don't you just love those statistics and 'fascinating facts' that you always find in press releases for launches of this kind? The Evening Standard told us on Wednesday that 50,000 granite blocks in 17 different sizes had been used to replace every paving stone in the square, but most of all we enjoyed reading about the special coating that's been applied to the granite to make it easier to remove chewing gum!

Next we need to sort out a method for reserving our places by the red carpet.  Being just around the corner, there must be a way we can do this without having to queue from 5am.  Ideas and tips on a postcard please...

Jeffrey Jupp

Should barristers be afraid of mediation?  Surely the rise in popularity of mediation and other forms of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is posing a major threat to the lifeblood of the Bar -  its specialist skills in advocacy and court work? In conversation this week Jeffrey Jupp, head of commercial at leading barristers set 7 Bedford Row, tells me it's not a threat at all but an opportunity.

Jeffrey has represented many commercial clients in mediation and is highly experienced in this form of dispute resolution.  His first mediation was more than eight years ago and it is now a regular part of his practice alongside his Court work. 'People often assume that mediation is a new phenomenon for the Bar, but it's been around for a long time. The starting point was the Court of Appeal case Dunnett v Railtrack and this was in 2002, so a full 10 years ago.  The case put the marker down for ADR, establishing the principle that if a party had failed to consider it properly before pitching up in court then they could expect to be penalised on costs. This was the moment the legal profession realised it needed to get up to speed with ADR - and fast. Today it is a regular feature in most commercial litigation barristers' practices.'

I asked Jeffrey whether he thought barristers were better suited to mediation than solicitors, having such a nuanced understanding of the 'anatomy' of a dispute.  'Most specialist commercial litigation solicitors will have just as nuanced an understanding of dispute dynamics and how the courts work as we do. From experience I'd say it's not whether you're a solicitor or barrister that makes the difference.  What defines the success of a mediation is the readiness of the parties and their advisors to enter meaningful negotiations and their willingness to see the other party's point of view. There is still an advocacy job to be done, but it is all about persuading the other side that it's in their interests to reach a settlement or agreement. It's an interesting shift from court work, in that it's the one time an advocate gets to speak directly to the people making the decisions on the other side. Over the years I've seen lawyers misjudge this horribly, instead grandstanding in front of their clients, or attempting to score points over the lawyers on the other side. Fatal to the success of a mediation.'

Only this week a Court of Appeal Judge made headlines critcising a defendant's decision not to pursue the option of mediation in a commercial case and warning they'd pay the penalty on costs. We loved Lord Justice Longmore's quote that mediators have a 'canny knack of transforming the intractable into the possible' and so mediation should not be spurned lightly.  The courts and the Government are becoming ever more keen on ADR and some legal commentators say it's only a matter of time before it becomes compulsory across all areas of the law, commercial litigation included.

***

'You can't run with the hare and hunt with the hounds' a leading commercial barrister said to me as we discussed the rather surprising news this week that trucking kings Stobart Ltd are moving in to the legal market. The promotion of their direct-to-barrister service proudly proclaimed the benefits of cutting out solicitors.  Hmm...curious.  The barristers involved are self-employed...so...do they not need to maintain a flow of other work from solicitor clients? 

How are these clients going to react when they realise their trusted barrister contacts are associated with a campaign that actively promotes the idea of them out of the picture? Certainly the boundaries between the solicitor and barrister role are changing, (not just direct access, but also the growing number of in-house advocacy teams in law firms), but the symbiotic relationship between solicitor and barrister remains key. The opportunity, my barrister chum enthuses, is to find new and exciting ways to work together and to field legal teams made up of individuals who are freer to play to their real, rather than assumed, strengths. Now that's a positive approach - and one that's got to be good for the end-user client.

***

The difference between humans and computers is all about our conversation, apparently.  Enjoyed reading about this year's Loebner Prize, the computer geek's dream competition that's all about challenging computer programs to fool judges into thinking they're human.

The Venue: Bletchley Park, home of the World War 2 code breaking centre where Alan Turing famously decrypted the German Enigma code. 
The Idea: according to Turing, the proof of a computer's 'intelligence' is not its actual intelligence or ability to think, but its ability to behave like it is intelligent and can think, ie to pass itself off as human. And the best way to test this? A conversation.

The Set-Up: in one room a group of humans answering judges' questions via a computer; over the internet computer programs doing the same.  Could the judges tell the difference?

The Results: some wonderfully surreal exchanges, my favourite being Q: 'Do you have an iPad?' A: 'I am thinking about life and death'.  You can see some of the other gems here.

One thought to leave you with: researching this story I learned that in previous years a number of the computers attempted to fool the judges into thinking they were human by including typos in their answers. Wonderful! 

Paul Sayers

Estates Gazette acting Professional and Legal Editor Paul Sayers is an expert in 'fierce conversations'. At an (actually very polite) discussion over lunch with Paul and colleague Henri May to discuss EG's plans for the legal section, I learned to my surprise that aside from a successful career in journalism and publishing (Sweet & Maxwell, Reed Elsevier then Reed Business Information), Paul is also a qualified people development coach. In fact he is a 'Certified Fierce Conversations Facilitator' no less - and of course I told him he absolutely should have this job title printed on his business card.  He works with training company PDA (People Development Associates), which is offically licensed by the wonderfully named and actually quite scary Fierce Inc.  Over a very pleasant meal and a glass of wine we discussed the work he does with PDA under the 'Fierce' banner in the context of conflict and mediation in the workplace.

'Fierce Inc's mantra is 'while no single conversation is guaranteed to change the trajectory of a career, a company, a relationship or a life... any single conversation can.' The point is that organisations are often blocked for months, even years, because of 'conflicted relationships'. And where these are left to fester, for fear of facing intractible issues, the cost to organisations can be vast in terms of management time and also hard cash. 

'Businesses can be transformed by developing conversation as a skill; by encouraging authentic, courageous, and clear dialogue; and by creating a culture where candour and curiosity are the norm.  There are huge positives: improving workplace communication will boost staff engagement and thus raise productivity levels.  But equally, it's also very much about avoiding the negative: we take the view that these unresolved conflicted relationships we talk about contribute to a large portion of the estimated annual £400m + cost to UK business of individual employment disputes. A very tangible justification for investing in training techniques to encourage staff to resolve relationship issues at the earliest stage before problems become entrenched.' 

You'd think that two careers would be enough for one person,  But digging into Paul's background to write up this blog post I also discovered he is artistic director, producer and actor at the Rooftop Theatre Company in St. Albans that specialises in 'lively and accessible' productions of Shakespeare and which recently won the 2012 Fringe Report Award for Best Shakespeare Producers.  This is most definitely a man full of surprises.

This blog post is the second in a series this May on the topic of dispute resolution. 

***

Big excitement came this week with the announcement of The Lawyer Awards shortlist. We were delighted to see Kysen clients well represented in the list, with Mayer Brown, Berwin Leighton Paisner and Russell Jones & Walker, all up for multiple awards and Weightmans up for Regional Firm of the Year. 

One entry we were particularly involved in was Brecher's, now shortlisted for the Boutique Firm of the Year Award. Having worked in-house at this firm in its previous incarnation Brecher & Co before its merger with Nicholson Graham & Jones (now K & L Gates) in the 1990s, I know just how excellent it is and the exciting things the team does at the very top of the property market. They regularly put people and deals together and actively make things happen in the market. These are the people who introduced buyer and seller in last year's landmark sale of Bond Street's Burlington Arcade to a US buyer. Historically they have been shy to promote themselves. Talk about a firm hiding its light under a bushel! But over the last year this has been changing and Brecher is starting to get the profile it deserves. They just need to win this Lawyer Award and justice will have been done!

***

What do Sacha Baron Cohen and the Master of the Rolls have in common? Generally speaking not a lot. But last night they were both at the Festival Hall: Sacha for the premiere of The Dictator, complete with red carpet, paparazzi and hoards of fans; and the Rt Hon Lord Neuberger as Chair of Russell-Cooke's panel discussion on 'Enforcing Regulatory Standards in a Liberalised Market'. This event had a star-studded line-up of its own: a keynote address from Legal Services Board Chair David Edmonds (who surprised me talking about his enthusiasm for the 'constant flow of new ideas' he sees vetting ABS licence applications); Law Society President John Wotton; and Vice Chairman of the Bar Maura McGowan QC. It was an excellent event and a 'variety of views' was most definitely expressed (but thankfully fisticuffs avoided). For an inside peek at the event, read Paul Rogerson's account in this week's Law Society Gazette or check out the live tweeting that took place at the event under the hashtag #regstandards.

Most memorable moment? Apparently Sacha Baron Cohen and his entourage inadvertently blocking Lord Neuberger from collecting his coat and having to be asked to move out of the way. The words 'Do you know who I am?' were heard ... and not from the Master of the Rolls.

Neil Denny

Neil Denny's thinking on conflict resolution is music to my ears. I have long had a fascination for the dynamics of dispute resolution, having worked  over the years with so many different types of litigator, both solicitors and barristers, and I always love to hear from those practitioners who are pushing the boundaries and developing some of the more creative approaches to it. 

Neil is a family lawyer and a consultant collaborative lawyer at Family Law in Partnership (founded by the very wonderful Gillian Bishop with whom, coincidentally, I worked almost 20 years ago when she was Head of Litigation at Brecher & Co and I was its in-house marketing manager). He is also a conflict management trainer and author of the excellent 'Conversational Riffs - creating meaning out of conflict'. The music analogy runs throughout his book: the foreword is renamed an 'Overture'; each chapter is listed as a different album track, complete with title page depicting a vinyl record; and the first chapter is entitled 'A Tune A Day'. In a nutshell his message is 'change the tune', ie learn how to alter your own rhythm of communication in order to disrupt recurring negative patterns and find new ones that lead to better outcomes.  And his theory applies as much to personal relationships as to commercial disputes. 

In conversation over coffee in Covent Garden this week (we met on Twitter but it turns out we work just 100 yards from each other in Long Acre - a very modern networking story) he talked in depth about his ideas and set me thinking for hours afterwards. We were meeting just as Neil was preparing to fly to Chicago and Seattle to give collaborative leadership training to lawyers and speak on 'Grudgeology' [love it Neil!] at the North West ADR conference. North America has a big appetite for his take on conflict resolution. You can see an example of Neil's work from his 'Do Lectures' talk last year ('Inspiring talks from people who are changing the world - Go Do!')

'Conversational Riffs' he tells me 'takes its inspiration from the world of blues music and how any 'riff' that a jamming musician plays will have a significant influence on the next musical sequence that his fellow jammers will respond with. The idea is to think about how your own conversational riffs will influence how the person you are communicating with will respond, whether the conversation is an argument, a debate, a negotiation, a complaint, or whatever.'

I love this musical analogy, as it suggests there is fun and enjoyment to be found in managing conflict - and this is a big theme for Neil: 

'Good relationships are not characterised by less conflict,' he says, 'but more! The key is to manage it positively.  A survey by Begbies Traynor, the UK's leading business rescue, recovery and restructuring specialist, revealed that typically nine out of 10 managers in the failing businesses they advise had hidden bad news from their directors (often issues relating to soured client relationships, poor staff morale, etc).  So senior management had been routinely fed an unrealistic view of the business.  No wonder they had failed in steering the business to success.  The managers' excuse (84% of them) for not passing this information on?  A fear that their own careers might suffer.   So the conflict issues were neither acknowledged nor addressed, but instead avoided out of fear of what the personal ramifications might have been.  But with all this avoidance of the real issues in the business, the ramifications came later anyway - and how!'

So no more need to shy away from conflict. In future, bring it on! I'll tell my family they have you to thank, Neil ;-)

This is the first in a series of blogposts this May on the topic of dispute resolution. 

***

The fracas caused by The Sun's Roy Hodgson front page this week was interesting to observe.  The speed at which most of the country seemed to leap on what they deemed spiteful and inappropriate was almost heartwarming. Announcing his appointment as England manager after the resignation of Fabio Capello, The Sun's headline 'Bwing on the Euwos! (We'll see you in Ukwaine against Fwance)' was roundly branded 'disgraceful journalism' and a debate ran for days across all media platforms, traditional and social, about whether it's right to focus biting satire on an individual's speech defect.

'Is offence ever justified on the grounds of humour?', 'Do different rules apply when poking fun at an individual's personal characteristics, rather than at poor performance in a highly paid role?' An old Sun classic was dragged out of the archives in evidence on this point: Graham Taylor likened to a turnip. 'But that was criticism of his performance, not a personal characteristic' the debate raged. 'But is it a speech impediment anyway, or just a speech variation, like a regional accent?'

What was really interesting though, was how it seemed to improve Hodgson's profile.  Not many people's first choice for the role, since The Sun's lampooning opinion has turned around and everyone's calling for the man to be given a chance and show us all what he can do before he's judged.

We're very proud that our clients Russell Jones and Walker advised Hodgson on his employment contract and that, very unusually for the media, lawyer Paul Daniels' role in this is being appreciated. Check out this piece in the Daily Mail: '20million reasons why Hodgson loves lawyers'.  You certainly worked your magic on this one Paul! 

***

Damien Hirst took me by surprise. Visiting his Retrospective exhibition at the Tate Modern I was quite prepared to tut and shake my head all the way round, disapproving of this precocious art pretender. But instead I was completely blown away. I can't think when I've seen a collection so colourful and so beautifully executed. He utterly won me over - that he had something genuine to say on his key themes of beauty, horror, life and death, and that these pieces weren't just attention-grabbing gimmicks. 

The highlight for me was the living butterflies in his 'In and out of Love' piece: huge, tropical, azure-blue and multi-coloured butterflies floated mesmerizingly around the room and honestly my heart skipped a beat. Do go and enjoy. It really is a treat!