Search results

The paper seeks to demonstrate in detail precisely how any city law firm can transform its profitability. Part 1 considers relevant concepts – change preference, paradigms and different approaches to creativity.

The four change preferences are defined, and the impact of difference on language and approach to leadership is considerd. The profiles of partners in a city law firm are examined. The organisational paradigm or recipe for success is defined, and the impact of implicit beliefs or blind spots is considered. The paper seeks to provide the reader with an understanding of cognitive thinking styles – adaptive and innovative, and connect to the “cautious control” and “positive creative” change management preferences.

Partners, on average, have a left‐brain bias and prefer to have a logically detached approach to change, rather than a focus on people issues. Decision takers have an innovative approach to change management. City law firms would best manage change by setting out a long‐term strategic intent, with a series of corporate challenges, implemented sequentially and connected to the past.

The paper will enable the reader to understand key relevant concepts and learn how law firms can most effectively manage change.

The aim of the paper is to share the recipe that enables a team‐builder to build in the workplace, out of any group of individuals, a high‐performing team in four hours.

After a period of research and testing, the recipe was formulated and successfully implemented over a 15‐year period with more than 1,000 groups.

The recipe confirmed the research findings by A.J. Romiszowski that the effective team improves the intellectual and creative thinking skills, as well as the sociability, of the individual.

The recipe enables radical improvement in individual, team and organisational performance.

The recipe is unique and is the only methodology to enable a high‐performing team to be built rapidly, delivering to any organisation a quantum leap in individual and team performance.

The purpose of parts I and II is to demonstrate in detail precisely how any city law firm can transform its profitability. Part II examines the business model, the “us” and “them” divide, alternative careers for lawyers, change management and culture change.

Sets out how the left‐brain business model limits the ability to transform profitability, pushes firms towards becoming a low cost producer and denies the ability to gain a competitive advantage; also sets out a range of strategies to reduce the “us” and “them” divide that currently exists; emphasises the need to provide a range of alternative careers for lawyers rather than continue with an “up” or “out” approach; demonstrates the dominance of the innovative change management paradigm, the negative consequences on effective change management and what could be a successful balanced change management paradigm; considers the importance of culture, why culture change initiatives fail and the damage caused by the lack of any explicit change management paradigm, and what could be a successful explicit paradigm that would transform profitability.

The left‐brain business model denies the ability to transform profitability or to gain a competitive edge in the marketplace. Profitability and motivation of graduates joining law firms would increase if a range of alternative careers was provided. Developing and implementing a balanced change management paradigm would radically improve change management and profitability. Creating a cultural competitive edge through implementing an explicit, team‐based cultural paradigm and focusing development on the core development competences of delegation and co‐ordination would transform profitability.

The value of part II is in enabling the reader to understand the complete range of strategies to transform city law firm profitability.

We can be adaptive or innovative in our cognitive thinking styles, and both are required for effective change management. Differences are not viewed positively and where key individuals diverge greatly from the group norm, they tend to leave, increasing the probability of corporate failure. Paradigms are defined and the divergent approach to paradigms of adaptors and innovators set out. Two case studies are detailed. One company had a successful business paradigm, which is being eroded, by having too adaptive an approach by key decision takers. The other company is successfully globalising but increasingly driven by a change paradigm that causes considerable inefficiency and the demotivation of adaptive staff. The article concludes by suggesting that a team approach will ensure the successful harnessing of creative diversity.

Before we can grow those we lead, we need to learn how to grow ourselves. This article focuses on how we achieve that through building our self‐confidence, using both affirmative statements and the ring of confidence; developing our awareness and ability to take constructive action; overcoming limiting beliefs though analysis and coaching and creating a written action plan to improve our performance in key areas of effective leadership where we are motivated to create effective change.

The purpose of the paper is to demonstrate to the reader that those organisations, which develop a complete explicit organisational paradigm and the strategy to implement it, will guarantee themselves a competitive edge in both short and long‐term profitability.

The paper defines a paradigm and provides an example of a “prevailing paradigm” or “recipe of success”. It provides the reader with understanding of cognitive thinking styles – adaptive and innovative. The paper considers the adaptive and innovate change management paradigms, the advantages and disadvantages, and suggests an effective explicit change management paradigm. It looks at the importance of culture, why culture change initiatives fail and suggests an effective explicit culture paradigmThe paper sets out a process that will enable any organisation to harness the power of paradigms and hence deliver a competitive edge in profitability.

If an organisation ensures that its core decision makers collectively develop explicit paradigms in all key business areas, it achieves strategic focus and increases its profitability at a faster rate than its competitors.

Develops an understanding of the nature and power of paradigms and how to harness that power to achieve a competitive edge in profitability.

Our view of leadership is affected by the subconscious impact of the literal meaning of the words “boss” and “leader”. Changing that view to COGAL (Creator of Growth and Learning) will improve our leadership approach. Research into the actions effective leaders take provides a working model of effective leadership with the key action areas being “developing themselves”, “leading by example”, “putting the followers’ work into context”, “developing their followers” and “providing support to their followers”. All managers questioned believe they are or can grow into COGALs. It is helpful to aim to be a 70 percent leader.

Describes the approach and the innovations introduced into management development in one of the leading global law firms. Outlines the introduction of a “top‐down” approach and its growth that, over time, created a culture where development was seen as a necessary, positive and welcome experience. Describes the recent overhaul of “management development” in the firm, and the introduction of a continuous development process. Notes that, in the programme, staff are effectively developed in the areas on which they will be assessed, as well as being prepared for more challenging roles in the future; performance is maximised as well as motivation.

The reasons for writing this paper are to enable the reader to understand: why delegation and co‐ordination are the core development competencies; how organisations can deliver a competitive edge, i.e. increase their profitability faster than the competition by focusing their development efforts on these development competencies; and the process required to introduce these competencies throughout the organisation.

A case study to demonstrate the importance of co‐ordination in the team‐leadership role. Report of research findings to indicate the benefits of effective group‐working for the individual and for the organisation and how co‐ordination is the critical skill to build effective groups. A case study to demonstrate how delegation is the key skill for leaders to build effective relationships with their followers. A demonstration as to how organisations, by focusing their development efforts on these two competencies, will not only deliver a competitive edge in terms of profitability but also save a fortune by abandoning expensive and now unnecessary “client‐focused” initiatives. Outlining the process to deliver the competitive edge.

If an organisation is prepared to train all its managers in delegation and co‐ordination skills, they will create a better working environment for their employees and increase their profitability at a faster rate than their competitors.

Develops an understanding of why and how organisations should focus their development efforts on the core skills of co‐ordination and delegation.

Perception gaps between the leader and follower demotivate the follower, impair the business relationship between them and reduce the business performance of both. There are two gaps in perception. The first is between the conscious intent of the leader and the manifestation of that intent. Key causes are stress, subconscious intent or poor communication by the leader. The second gap is between manifestation of intent by the leader and the impact on the follower. The causes here are the environment in which the communication occurs and the poor listening skills or mindset of the follower. Detailed solutions to eliminate all these causes and close the gaps are set out.