----- Original Message -----
To:Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 4:01 PM
Subject: August 2006 Newsletter
August 8, 2006
New York City
rodrigo gonzalez fernandez
director, consultajuridica
Dear rodrigo:
Dog Days of Summer? Well, not exactly: At least not here at "Adam Smith, Esq." (although the dog is making the most of where the airconditioner's output hits the floor at the optimal angle).
For starters, we launched the second "Reader Survey," which you should take if you haven't already: It takes 3—5 minutes, tops, and helps me understand how to make "Adam Smith, Esq." more useful to you and more focused on your key interests. Again, if you haven't taken it, click here to do so.
So, without further preliminaries, to this past month's "greatest hits:"
- My friend Professor Bill Henderson of Indiana University Law School/Bloomington published a paper available online about the characteristics and ramifications of single-tier (up-or-out, all equity partnerships) vs. two-tier (equity and non-equity, or "of counsel," etc.) partnership models. Empirically based, Bill's paper asserts that single-tier firms are more profitable based on PPP than two-tier firms across the board, even after controlling for geographic market segment and firm leverage. It's a counter-intuitive read, which has attracted some attention.
- In "The War for Talent," I frame a debate about what helps you retain valued associates. Legal Week posits that it's that familiar, but seemingly impossible-to-implement, "work/life balance," "flexibility," and recognition of "broader lifestyle aspirations" that keeps them happy—the "dove" school of thought. Conversely, McKinsey reports that the most important contributors to career satisfaction are the "hawk" values of the firm's culture, individual autonomy, exciting challenges, opportunities for growth, and that at the very bottom of the ladder (scoring mostly in the single-digits) are "respect for lifestyle" and "acceptable pace and stress" (1%!). Looking at your career, which is it for you?
- In a geographic analysis of the migratory patterns, as it were, of the AmLaw 200 and the Fortune 500 over the past couple of decades, I see if there's an explanation for the correlation between the concentration of (a) corporate headquarters; (b) BigLaw lawyers; and (c) the best art, fashion, and cuisine (sorry—made that last one up).
- "What Are Other Firms Doing?" Wrong! looks at our penchant for benchmarking and whether our training in precedent and risk-aversion gets us in trouble when we don our C[X]O hats.
- And lastly, I discuss reasons behind the oft-remarked divergence between a firm's "intended" strategy and its "realized" strategy, and explain what some Harvard Business School professors have to say about the lamentable phenomenon.
For our bonus, newsletter-only content, this month we feature the Big News that Freshfields decided to introduce non-equity partners into its structure. As the ranks of single-tier, equity-only, firms shrink, surely Freshfields' bowing to the inevitable (or was it?—that's really the question, isn't it?) ranks as a headline event.
Your assignment is, first, to take a look at this Legal Week piece discussing the perceived benefits (economic) and risks (cultural) of Freshfields' move, and then to share your thoughts about the implications through this handy-dandy "Adam Smith, Esq." poll—for newsletter readers, only.
And if you want to know what your newsletter-reading colleagues think of Freshfields' move, that's right: You'll have to check out next month's newsletter.
As always, I invite thoughts, comments, and observations. That wraps up the "Adam Smith, Esq." monthly newsletter for August 2006.
My parting wish for you all is that: (a) you share this with friends and colleagues who might find it of at least incidental interest; and (b) of far greater importance, that you let me know how I can make it sharper, more useful, more helpful.
Best regards,
| If you no longer wish to receive the monthly "Adam Smith, Esq." newsletter, have you completely taken leave of your senses?! But if you insist, please reply to this message with "Unsubscribe" in the subject line or simply click on the following link: Unsubscribe |
This message was sent by Adam Smith, Esq. using VerticalResponse's iBuilder®
|  |
Adam Smith, Esq.
305 West 98th Street
#4C-S
New York, New York 10025 Read the VerticalResponse marketing policy. |
