Handling Criticism

During the summer you will receive criticism. Most firms give periodic evaluations. It is also possible that an assigning attorney will take time to offer you feedback on your work. The coin of feedback has two sides — praise and criticism. You learn more from the latter than from the former. If you are a solid citizen who is committed and enthusiastic you can learn great deal from constructive criticism. You must understand why it is given and what it means.

            Criticism is usually well-intended. Firms want you to succeed — if you are bright, well-liked, and energetic — the natural human instinct takes over. The partners running the summer program want to run a successful program. Experienced lawyers love to find new lawyers who they can bring into their groups or teams.

             That, in one respect, is what the summer program is all about. Criticism is not delivered in the abstract. It is delivered on the spot when you have made a mistake at a quieter moment during the project when the assigning attorney has a moment to breathe or during the regular review process.

            Some lawyers are just unpleasant or angry people. Usually, however, the lawyer is angry about because your mistake disrupted his schedule, confused his client, screwed up an issue in a brief, or otherwise made his professional life unpleasant.

            Depersonalize your reaction and learn from it. Contain your own hostility, rage, anger, and other emotional reactions. Do not head to your office in tears, vent your emotions to other summer associates or storm off into professional oblivion. At the end of the day run five miles or bike around the lake. (For those of you in cities without a waterfront or bike paths, I’ll await your call in 2010 about your next job.)

            Regain your focus and knock the next pitch out of the ballpark. Nothing distinguishes you faster than overcoming adversity — a trait common to all exceptional lawyers.

To stand out amongst the best recruiters and gain influence with clients, there are four core qualities that a recruiter must have:

1. The ability to persuade.  Recruiters who hope to gain influence with their clients and in their industry must be able to persuade clients to take the direction that the recruiter knows will be best for their company.  Many clients come to the table with set ideas and plans that if implemented could actually do more harm than good.  Recruiters who are influencers are able to persuasively prove to clients that an alternative plan would better serve their company’s needs.
2. The ability to strategize.  Influential recruiters are not only able to skillfully navigate the hiring process; but they can also navigate the unfortunate politics that come with the recruiting territory.
3. Natural confidence.  Confidence and ease as a recruiter comes with experience and knowledge.  The best clients want to leave their hiring needs in the hands of recruiters who are competent and confident in their abilities.  In this case, being timid and humble does not pay.
4. The ability to “make rain.”  The most influential recruiters don’t wait around for things to happen.  They are the active force in their business.  Influential recruiters take the initiative with clients and tackle problems and obstacles with a “can do” attitude.

Many new and experienced attorneys are remaining unemployed for extended periods of time.  Some may view that period of unemployment as a black mark against their resume and may be tempted to “stretch the truth” a little so they can cover up their period of unemployment.  My advice:  Don’t do it.  Mark Villeneuve, a Connecticut-licensed lawyer who gave in to such a temptation when he allegedly lied several times about his work experience when applying for a staff attorney position at the state’s Workers’ Compensation Commission.

According to state officials, Villeneuve falsely claimed that he graduated cum laude from Western New England College School of Law in 2004 and that he served as the law review's assistant note editor. He also allegedly claimed that he was employed at the Law Offices of Jean Smith in Meriden, Conn., a firm that Villeneuve said handled all types of workers' comp matters—another falsehood.

State officials are also claiming that the inconsistencies in Villeneuve’s claims were revealed during a face-to-face interview for the position in February 2008. If found guilty of the charges, Villeneuve could face professional disciplinary action because the state’s ethics rules for lawyers clearly states that lawyers cannot lie.

Job candidates should avoid embellishing their resume because such “little white lies” could damage your legal reputation.  Remember, recruiters and employers are conducting more thorough background checks before and sometimes even after employment has been secured.  Some attorneys face background checks by clients in high profile cases that involve lots of money or where a lot is at risk.  Don’t take the chance of ruining your reputation, remain truthful at all times.

1. Make your clerkship search targeted. The average job seeker sent judicial clerkship applications to 37 judges.  And those applications were probably “generic.” Do yourself a favor and pick out the judges you want to work with.  Do your research and even try to network with the judge or those around him/her. 
2. Send your application by mail.  It will be easier to get lost in the shuffle if you’re among 400,000 applicants who choose to apply for clerkships online. Instead apply via mail because some judges have expressed a preference for mailed applications, while others are outright ignoring online applicants.
3. Go small.  Think about taking a clerkship in a smaller community. Even if you need to move, working in a smaller community could be the boost you need to find a job.

And just in case you were wondering, judicial clerkships aren’t just for new graduates.  As mentioned earlier, attorneys with lots of work experience are often given preference by some judges so be willing to include a judicial clerkship on your list of potential jobs

On November 20th & 21st over 300 women gathered in Chicago for Ms. JD's 3rd Conference on Women in the Law: Avenues to Advancement. The first day of the conference featured a day-long skills workshop for law students facilitated by the Project on Attorney Retention and the University of Texas School of Law Center for Women in Law. The second day of the conference included panel discussions on a wide range of topics including "The Old Girls Club: Maximizing Women's Initiative Effectiveness", "The Indispensable Junior Associate," and "Bring on the Rain: Business Development Strategies." Speakers and panelists included Michele Mayes, VP & GC Allstate Insurance; Andrea Zopp, VP & GC Exelon Corp.; Cathy Lamobley, former GC Shell Oil Co.; Sue Bettman, VP & GC R R Donnelley & Sons Co.; Judge Joan Lefkow, Northern District of Illinois; Kelly Hoey, President 85 Broads; and Corrine Wood, former Lt. Governor of Illinois.

The feedback from conference attendees has been overwhelmingly positive. Students rated the skills-workshop among the most valuable experiences of their legal education. That assessment was echoed by the volunteer faculty who worked with them and described the workshop as the best of its kind. Given this feedback, Ms. JD now plans to replicate this workshop model for junior associates as well as other students groups. Of course the aim of the conference was not just to disseminate content, but also to strengthen Ms. JD's community presence. On that count the conference was a smashing success. In the months following the conference Ms. JD's online traffic has steadily increased and now receives roughly 115,000 unique visits per month, making Ms. JD.org the central online meeting place for women in law and the nexus between women in the profession and law students aspiring to join them.

Ms. JD is a nonprofit, nonpartisan web-based community founded by female law students and dedicated to reinforcing and expanding the representation of women in law school and the legal profession.  Between 1948 and 2001 the number of women attending law school consistently increased. That trend appears to have reversed. Every year for the last 8 years the proportion of law school classes occupied by women has decreased.  Ms. JD aims to get our profession and our institutions back on track.

The Blog: Ms JD.org features content ranging from “Advice on Taking the Bar Exam” and “How to Get a Clerkship” to “What to Wear to an Interview” and “Networking Advice for Female Law Students.”  Contributors include students and young attorneys along with notable guest bloggers like Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, General Elena Kagan, Slate.com's Dahlia Lithwick, Professor Herma Hill Kay, Professor Barbara Babcock, and Judge Dorothy Nelson.

The Network: In 2008, Ms. JD formed the National Women Law Students’ Organization at 70 law schools.  NWLSO continues to grow, with local events throughout the year and annual gatherings at Ms. JD's conferences. Through NWLSO, Ms. JD has created a “rapid response” network that connects professionals to students and can spread news about women in the law, job opportunities, resources, and events.

The Library: Two years ago Ms. JD created the most comprehensive online collection of resources available on women in the law. The Library, now jointly maintained with the University of Texas School of Law Center for Women in Law, holds hundreds of articles, reports, and best practice recommendations on all topics relevant to women in the legal profession.

The Scholarship: Every summer Ms. JD funds summer stipends for two female law students dedicated to public interest work. Past recipients have used their stipends to intern at the ICC in the Hague, the JAG Corps, the ACLU Voting Rights Project, and the Equal Justice Foundation.

The Fellowship:  Ms. JD is launching the Leadership Fellows program. In conjunction with the ABA's Commission on Women in the Profession's Margaret Brent Award, Ms. JD will match 20 high-achieving female law students with mentors from among the Commission's alumnae of commissioners and award winners. The one-year program is designed to foster a commitment to excellence in a new generation of women attorneys, inspired by the generation of trailblazers who paved the way for their success.

The Research: In 2009, Ms. JD launched its first original research initiative, collecting data on the representation of women in orders of the coif, law reviews, and clerkship placements at the nation's top law schools. 

Ms. JD spreads the word: women's victories are everyone's victories!

www.ms-jd.org 

Reason #1 – Working with only one legal recruiter eliminates your chances of having a double submission.   One of the biggest problems facing attorneys who use multiple legal recruiters is that they are often submitted to the same employer by different legal recruiters which can cause them to lose the opportunity.  Many employers simply aren’t willing to take the risk of a fee dispute that could arise if they hired an attorney who was submitted by more than one legal recruiter.

Reason #2 – By working with one legal recruiter, the job candidate can take the time to develop a relationship with the recruiter.  When working with multiple recruiters it can be difficult to develop a working relationship beyond the surface.

Reason #3 – By having only one recruiter who has submitted your resume to and sent you on interviews with their clients, you will have one source that will know you well.  That one legal recruiter will receive feedback from their clients and can in turn share that feedback with you. Also they will have a thorough knowledge of where you were submitted.

 Of course the choice to work with multiple legal recruiters is up to you. If you do choose to work with multiple legal recruiters, it is important that you keep meticulous records of where you were submitted and by whom.