Stick figure in thought small
Challenging circumstances often cause leaders to revert to their default leadership styles. instead, matching, switching or combining styles can be much more effective.

A senior leader of a corporate client recently expressed frustration  at one of her senior manager’s continued dogmatic, almost autocratic style of leadership, which was beginning to irk a number of people in and around his team. In his defence he was only trying to get everyone else to respond to emergency situations as assertively as he did, but it nevertheless seemed to be heading for real issues, and possibly even a disastrous situation for the manager and organisation.

It seemed that due to his background (para-military) and personality, he was defaulting to using his usual or trained style of leadership in all circumstances.  He was not consciously aware of adapting this style to match the demands of the situation or people he was dealing with.

It reminded me of an article I read some time ago by Daniel Goleman which provided a handy summary of some of these leadership styles and when they could and should be used. He includes a handy table in the article which I have shared with many clients.


Continue Reading

Lyda Hawes is the Director of Client Services at LexBlog, the company that developed this blog. From time to time she and I have discussed the topic of management and leadership and I asked her to share her thoughts in this guest post. She also writes for LexBlog’s Client Services blog, Please Advise. Apart from this, as all who deal with her will confirm, she is one of those special people you get to deal with in the business world from time to time – Sean

Leadership vs Management? In this guest post Lyda Hawes  reviews this age-old distinction. I always encourage managers to develop their leadership skills and leaders to exercise good management skills as and when that is required as part of their role – Sean

Comparing the difference between leaders and managers is a popular topic in the leadership blogosphere. In fact, if you do a Google search on “leader vs manager” you get over 30 million results. While I expect there are examples that extoll the virtues of managers buried somewhere in those 30 million sites (well, at least I am aware of one, the one I wrote almost a year ago, Managers are People Too), the general consensus is that leaders are where all the cool stuff like vision and strategy take place, and managers are often left to the less fun task of managing tasks. In the 1989 book, “On Becoming a Leader,” author Warren Bennis gave us these comparisons (cited from The Wall Street Journal):

  • The manager administers; the leader innovates.
  • The manager is a copy; the leader is an original.
  • The manager maintains; the leader develops.
  • The manager focuses on systems and structure; the leader focuses on people.
  • The manager relies on control; the leader inspires trust.
  • The manager has a short-range view; the leader has a long-range perspective.
  • The manager asks how and when; the leader asks what and why.
  • The manager has his or her eye always on the bottom line; the leader’s eye is on the horizon.
  • The manager imitates; the leader originates.
  • The manager accepts the status quo; the leader challenges it.
  • The manager is the classic good soldier; the leader is his or her own person.
  • The manager does things right; the leader does the right thing.
    Continue Reading

I know that a managing partner is appointed to lead and run a law firm and should do just that – get on with the job. However, there are many things that a firm must in turn do, ideally up-front, to assist their newly appointed managing partner and to give him or her a fair shot at making a go of a very challenging and sometimes trying role. Leaders, particularly new ones, are real people and need real help and support. Wise firms put this in place.

A new managing partner and no doubt his or her partners will be raring for him or her to take up the role and ‘make a difference’. It is worth spending some time however  thinking about how to make it easier for him or her and to provide proper support – upfront.

The problem is that due to the strange animal that is the law firm partnership or equivalent, most firms don’t really get involved to implement just a few basic steps that can serve to make or break a managing partner, or at least increase the chances of success and his or her maintaining some semblance of normal life. The right steps taken up-front, and a few carefully thought-through foundation-stones laid, can make his or her life so much easier and get a much better outcome for all concerned.

Partnerships have this strange view that because they have chosen someone from their ranks who they believe has the credentials to lead (and usually does) that this is the end of the matter – the new incumbent can and will sort out any teething snags or issues arising in relation to the role and will simply work out work and time pressures and so on. The problem is that most new incumbents believe this as well. They don’t want to undermine the partners’ confidence in them or give any indication that they are struggling and need help.

It is not a good combination and can quite unnecessarily lead to a bad outcome, and be tough on the managing partner. It is fair to say that the root causes of many managing partner roles not panning out can be traced back to what is or is not done in these early stages.

What are some of the challenges faced when a new managing partner is appointed?

  1. a fear by the managing partner he or she will, over time, lose a highly successful practice;
  2. a fear (by the incumbent and the firm) that the managing partner may never re-build a practice after the role and may be left high and dry. This can cause all manner of defensive behaviours which can work counter to making a success of a leadership role;
    Continue Reading

As highlighted in PART ONE and PART TWO of this series, there are real leadership lessons for legal leaders from the career, achievements and life of the late Steve Jobs – who in just two stints of 9 and 14 years, founded and then transformed Apple Computer into the world’s most valuable company. These were the lessons highlighted by Walter Isaacson, author of the Steve Jobs biography, in an April 2012 Harvard Business Review article ‘The real leadership lessons of Steve Jobs‘ (subscription required).

In this post we include a final batch of important lessons, again with liberal editing and interpretation for legal leaders.

Jobs liked engaging face to face but was tough on people, was a strategic guru but totally focused on detail, strongly believed in the confluence of the humanities and sciences and in staying hungry and foolish – so many contradictions, such a genius, and so much, with the right attitude, we can learn from him. (Image composite by Sean Larkan courtesy of Google Images – photographers unknown)

 13    Engaging face to face and death(?) to PowerPoint

Jobs felt that creativity came from spontaneous meetings, from random discussions and was a great believer in face-to-face meetings: “. . . you run into someone, you ask what they are doing, you say “wow”, and soon you are cooking up all sorts of ideas“. He designed his buildings to promote unplanned encounters and collaborations. He felt that if you did not encourage that you would lose a lot of innovation in the magic that is sparked by serendipity.


Continue Reading

Last week I posted PART ONE of a short four-part series on the real leadership lessons of Steve Jobs, based in part on an HBR article (subscription required) of a similar title by Walter Isaacson, author of the Steve Jobs autobiography. We continue the theme today!

A number  (but not all) of these provide great leadership and management pointers for legal leaders. I hope to persuade you to take some of these on board but of course they should not be slavishly followed – maybe emulate some, adapt others for your needs, your leadership style and firm needs, or simply think deeply about them.

It is not often in one’s life-time that one gets to experience, read about and learn from a unique character and leader of the ilk and achievements of Jobs. In his life-time he made no bones about pinching ideas and inspiration from others – I don’t think it is an opportunity any of us mere mortals should miss!  I wrote an article on related points in our Edge International Communiqué (PDF) which may also be of interest.

Of reading things not yet on a page, reality distortion fields, avoiding bozo explosions, making products feel friendly and casual and staying hungry and foolish – some of the many lessons from the business genius that was Steve Jobs, and what it can mean for law firm leaders (image compilation by Sean Larkan with thanks to the folk at Google Images)

6   ‘As leaders we need to read things that are not yet on the page

Jobs felt very strongly about understanding deeply about what clients want. However he regarded this as completely different to asking them what they want – simply because he didn’t feel they knew until they were told! He felt one needed to exercise and use one’s intuition and ascertain and nurture the desires of clients. As he said “our task is to read things that are not yet on this page“. He developed his intuition when studying Buddhism in India and felt it was a lot more important than intellect. Eknath Easwaran, mentioned in my last post, would have said the same.

There are lessons here for law firms as most like to follow what others are doing and not necessarily take the lead.  This is due to the prevalent fixed mind-set and passive-defensive styles of avoidance, oppositional and conventional behaviours, thinking and interaction that prevails, governed in many cases by an innate fear of failure. There have however been some wonderful examples in recent years, particularly in Australasia and Africa, of law firms doing some very innovative stuff!

7   You don’t have to be the first cab off the rank, but when you do go, you better offer something unique.
Continue Reading

Walter Isaacson, author of the Steve Jobs autobiography, commented in an April 2012 Harvard Business Review article ‘The real leadership lessons of Steve Jobs‘ (subscription required), that following the publication of his book many writers have tried to draw management lessons from Steve Jobs, however, most of them, incorrectly, became fixated rather on the “rough edges of his personality“. He feels that one has to recognise that Jobs’ personality and approach to business were inextricably inter-twined, and we should go beyond this to appreciate the keys to his success.

A number  (but not all) of these keys provide great leadership and management lessons for legal leaders. I hope to persuade you to take some of these on board. In practice I find that very few firms do. I wrote an article on related points in our Edge International Communiqué (PDF) which may also be of interest.

In the quirky and sometimes controversial way Steve Jobs led and managed, there are important lessons for legal leaders. To make the most of these does require a different attitude and approach to that which one normally associates with leading a firm in a conservative profession. (composite image with thanks to the folk at Google Images)

Jobs was an amazing human being. He achieved incredible things as he managed and led Apple to become the world’s most valuable company. Remarkably, this all happened in two relatively short periods between 1976 and 1985 (9 years) and from 1995 to 2011 (14 years) during which time he was booted out of the company but then brought back to resurrect and save it. A lot of this had to do with his leadership and management styles.

He transformed:

  • personal computing
  • animated films
  • music
  • phones
  • tablet computing
  • retail stores
  • digital publishing

He created:

  • Apple, the company
  • Apple Stores
  • iMac
  • iPhone
  • iPod
  • iPad
  • Pixar
  • iTunes
  • iTunes Store
  • MacBook
  • App Store
  • OSX Lion

Not bad for a college drop-out!  So, what are some of the lessons legal leaders can draw from all this?

1   Focus – ‘deciding what not to do as important as deciding what to do’


Continue Reading

Soft Power leadership may provide a helpful framework of understanding and application for leaders or senior managers of professional service firms (PSF), particularly law firms.

Undertaking a leadership role in a PSF has always presented some unique challenges around power and leadership styles.  The reason is that the traditional sources and trappings of power and authority available to leaders in the corporate world are almost never available to PSF leaders.

The exercise of leadership is also different – even where authority has been granted, it is usually exercised with real care and discrimination. I believe Soft Power is a style of leadership which can play a role here – it relies on influencing others based on one’s set of values, personal attributes and leadership style, rather than traditional bases for power. I think it makes sense for PSFs. If it can be made to work, it affirms you don’t need the normal corporate sources of power to succeed in leadership.

Soft Power – a style of leadership which relies on influencing others based on one's set of values, personal attributes and example rather than traditional bases for power (iPad graphic by Sharon Larkan with thanks to Alan Moir for the idea)

What is Soft Power leadership? Let’s break it down, in reverse order:

  • leadership means leading or going forward, the skill to help a group define and achieve a common purpose. There are various types of leadership, but all have in common a relationship with followers and therefore some form of power over them. Leadership and power are therefore inextricably intertwined.
  • power at a general level is the ability to influence the behaviour of others, to get the outcomes one wants, through the possession of certain capabilities or resources.  You can coerce with threats, induce with payments or attract or co-opt.
  • Soft Power rests on the ability to shape the preferences of others. It relies on influencing others based on one’s set of values, personal attributes and leadership style. It is about attracting and co-opting. On the other hand hard power typically comes to the fore through authority and coercion, and for countries, through military might and economic power (e.g. USA and China, although China is studying the application of Soft Power principles).

Where did the concept of Soft Power come from?
Continue Reading