I’m thinking of that Larry David moment when he walks on stage, takes a look at the audience, ponders then says “nah” and walks off.

In the end I just posted this. No auto share. Oh the peace.

h/t to JH

Splitting the in-house atom

There are essentially two parts to an in-house legal department; intellect and process.

They are connected but not the same. 

You can’t truly liberate the first until you properly organise the second. Workflow doesn’t sound exciting but getting it right can be transformative to an in-house legal department. And it’s not something that you do in half measures.

One final thought. Intellect for lawyers is their  comfort zone. Workflow is not a comfort zone for lawyers. Which explains why most change in big corporate legal departments is increasingly being lead by the operational side of the underlying business and less so by the GC.

The tiniest things can make a big difference´╗┐

When a junior member of staff drops an email to the CEO they are not looking for a long dialogue because they know that you are important and busy.

But clicking reply and typing the words ‘thank you’ (or even ‘ty’) can have a huge impact. And it takes seconds to do. Imagine that impact if you pass them in the corridor and said “I appreciate the email, sorry I haven’t got back but I like what you are saying.”

The really smart leader knows when to deploy their ‘ty.’

Recognition is powerful, no matter how small, even just two words. Bothering can change someone’s day. Even yours.

Your choice.

Like’s Labour’s Lost (exeunt Twitter?)

The truth is we want to be liked. We want to be engaged with our fellow human. We crave to hang out with the cool kids in the playground. If you don’t accept that then I think you are in denial.

Twitter et al have just made that easy, even lazy, and process driven.

Last week on my 50th birthday I got ‘congrats’ from people on LinkedIn I barely know and certainly don’t engage with. To be honest it felt awkward because it felt a bit insincere. Lazy push button dashboard insincerity that was a million miles away from the huge surprise birthday dinner my wife organised where family and friends (some travelling a great distance) came together to mark my day. A treasured memory. I didn’t share it on social because it was hard to convey the emotion and tbh why should I, few would care that much anyway.

Today we don’t have to do the hard work, the risk taking, the creation of trust, the building of relationships that demand intimacy, exposing our vulnerabilities, the connecting. And why would we when all our ‘relationships’ are a click away?

But we should try harder.

Debate, discussion, relationship building in real life is very different to social media. In real life you have to respond there and then. You can’t edit, delete, ignore. Your whole body language is on display. In real time you cannot hide. It’s hard for a reason. But it’s also exciting, life affirming and can change things that get increasingly buried in the social media ‘noise.’ Also, and this is important, our fellow human is far more forgiving, far less judgemental, far better at collaborating when we move to ‘in real life.’

To be honest many of the people I meet via social media are a huge disappointment as I am, no doubt, to them.

Will I leave Twitter? Nope. I have a handful of people I call my friends who I engage with via DM because it is an efficient process, (it’s not always easy to meet for a coffee in my favourite New York diner). I also follow fascinating and quirky accounts that satisfy my needs for the arts, news, sports journalism and reflection on world events. Oh, in case you forgot, many that make me laugh out loud with their clever humour and sarcasm.

But where this ultimately ends up as is small, tight networks built around trust and value that matter to me (and you). Just like we used to do when the cool kids didn’t want to know us and before we worked out that those cool kids actually weren’t cool at all.


Yes this is another ranty post. But it’s short. Well shorter than the last one.

What is it about people who post negative and at times nasty comments on blogs or articles anonymously? They are pat on the head type comments, you know the sort, “how could you possibly know as much as me?” Their tone is always masculine with a hint of “run along dear, two sugars in mine.” I don’t claim to be a feminist but I do try to not be a dickhead.

Two words Mr Anon. Piss off.

If you haven’t got the courage of your convictions to declare who you are then go do one. Which you won’t because in your sad disillusioned way you’ll see this post as a kind of victory. The really sad bit, the bit you are way too arrogant to comprehend, is that we in the silent majority seats are laughing at you. Yep.

People don’t need smug smart arsses who lack the guts to even tell us who they are with their Mornington Crescent nonsense. It’s more juvenile than a Year 4 playground. It’s ego at its most twisted and destructive. It’s hiding in the shadows rather than standing up to be counted.

Nope no comments on this blog. I’d rather engage with Anonymous (or anyone) on the open fields of Twitter. But then that means declaring your hand and I can’t see that happening any time soon because level playing fields just aren’t your natural environment are they Mr Anon?