Customer Service and the Nature of Attorneys

Yeah, there is actually a Nintendo game called Apollo Justice, Ace Attorney, where the player may either operate to gather evidence or operate in the courtroom. This isn't about that game - for I've never played it. I simply like how the graphic depicts some views of attorneys, for better or for worse.

Because let's face it. When it comes to customer service, it's all about perception. And sometimes the perception we have of roles in our society are skewed. I believe one such role with a skewed view from the general public is the attorney. Here's why: we see TV shows or films that depict attorneys as extroverts, aggressive and sometimes with something "up their sleeve". The Atticus Finches (character of the Pulitzer prize-winning novel To Kill a Mockingbird)seem to be a thing of the past unless you are a Dan Brown or John Grisham fan who usually focuses on the lawyer who represents the underdog.

If our perspective is in line with the general public, we distrust them, for they seem to act based on the bottom line - the almighty dollar. In truth, attorneys are most commonly introverts. They are book worms who enjoy researching, which in the case of discovering legal precedence and establishing a case for their client, is on target with what we would expect them to do. Therefore when it comes to being responsive, they fall short.

With high customer service, being responsive is a huge deal. As in other customer service perceptions, from attorney to client, there is a huge gap in perception about whether the attorney is responsive. Perhaps it starts with understanding what exactly being responsive means.

An attorney would claim to respond to messages in timely fashion - within days of a client reaching out to them. Yet a client wants them to respond within hours. What stands in the attorney's way? Their endless task list. Face it. The attorney is task-driven moreso than relationship driven, even when they are "into" people. The introvert, whether task or people focused, prefers distance, space and time to mull things over. But with customer service, it's not about the attorney. It's about the client.

From the client's view, responsiveness not only means responding within hours, but responding in such a way they (client) feel valued. When the attorney creates a working relationship of understanding, interpreting what the client needs, they feel valued. Yet most attorneys, although they can intellectually appreciate what customer service is, they are hard-pressed to demonstrate it. An attorney is the sort of individual which is minimally self-aware. And with that comes the inability to gain awareness in what their client wants - this limits the attorney's ability to connect. Without that connection, truth and trust have their limits.

In the professional market of offering world-class legal service, quality customer service leads to referrals, further business association and dynamic reputation that goes beyond the final decision. It impacts the experience the client felt, the trust they develop and the awe and respect the attorney deserves. For those attorneys who are looking for peace of mind and self-satisfaction, responsiveness is key to their livelihood. They understand the benefits to delivering from the client's point of view. To them, professional coaching and support in the behaviors that lead to the best client experience is crucial. With the ability to connect and then to further this responsiveness to a strong focus on the client, customer satisfaction shifts from the average to above average. Couple that with strong research and thorough preparation and the client is holding the legal professional in awe.

What will it take for you to be responsive? I hope it includes asking good questions that lead to understanding. Also pulling self away from tasks to respond quickly to client needs while also disciplining self to focus on what is important. Soon you'll be breaking the assumption of the nature of attorneys and possibly redefining it.

The most valuable form of recognition - Communication

Over the weekend I spent quality time with friends, one I hadn't seen in years. When it comes to reconnecting with people, my first thought is, "gee, what will they think of me now?" And so as we were getting re-aquainted, it was so fun to watch the looks of surprise and discover the number of times we thought alike about our experiences.

What I didn't anticipate in this meeting with my dear friend from the past (high school!) was her sharing what she always admired about me. Gosh, such an added bonus to learn those private viewpoints, now, a good 30 years later. It just stands to reason that when we're with friends, we want to know their thoughts, as well as the impact we are making.

We humans naturally take similar thought processes with us to other life circles. On the job, this "I wonder what they will think of me?" shows up in a slightly altered way. Basically, it affects the topics of communication we treasure from those around us.

There are 3 key topics of conversation employees value:

1. Employees value getting information about their job
2. They value getting information about their performance
3. They value getting information about how the company is doing

When our boss is clear about their expectations of us, this gives us a baseline to follow. Additionally, the more they share about the mission of the dept/company, about the values represented and strategies used to approach them, the further along we are in being oriented into the history and everyday production.

Speaking to these things is one thing. What really communicates is actions. My first boss when I was a high school teacher was a principal who carried smiles on his face, words of positive encouragment and letters of praise. He loved the teaching staff and proved it through his actions. He had a quick sense of humor vs. a quick sense of rage. He was at ease with the women as well as with the men, showing his progressive leadership style vs. the "good 'ole boy" manager. Ron was a quality leader - one who communicated his values through his actions.

Words, actions and then a variety of visual aids supplement what is important to us. On his office walls hung pictures of his family, motivational sayings and pictures of his staff. When we walked into his office, we felt at home. We only had to look at his walls and we saw what he thought of our performance. Yes, we all want to know not only what we SHOULD do, but how well we are doing. Ron was quick to inform us through specific conversations, through words of praise, through observation of special moments and through debriefing after challenging times. We got this information in multiples - and that makes a difference.

Not only did Ron care enough to let us know how we were doing, he cared enough to let us know how the school district was doing. This impacted our focus on future goals, on budgets for our school activities and accounts and it helped us understand the day-to-day priorities. Being kept in the loop contributed to his staff's trust of him - and it showed that he trusted us as well.

Ron didn't have the resources to give us monetary recognition in a sizeable way, yet it wasn't necessary. He gave us what was most important - trusted communication.

Since then I have learned that leaders who listen are leaders who when speaking, will have the full attention of their audience. Their willingness to be quiet, to really tune into those around them, to enter a space in order to observe vs. in order to be observed, is the sign of a quality individual. They develop curiousity. They attract notice and they make an impact. If there is anything listening is second to, it's positive communication.

Positive communication sets the tone for the environment. Letters of appreciation, phone calls of support and face to face recognition are proof there has been an investment in office relationships. These leaders would be willing to call new hires at home prior to their first day as a sign of welcome and anticipation. They would share letters of praise from clients/customers/community about direct reports. They would encourage open or anonymous questions and guarantee responses.

Thinking, actions AND words create the space for an environment full of recognition. Evaluate where you are with your communication. Most of us have someone we can recognize who is deeply interested in our perspective. Who is that for you?

Curtain's Up in the Courtroom!

When I was in college studying communications and theatre in the late 70's/early 80's, I learned that law students were required to take theatre or drama classes. I don't know whether all law schools had this in their requirements, but I didn't care. What mattered to me was that attorneys had to develop some discipline. It made sense to me. Rather like Mark Antony, litigators are performers who must influence their audience (judge or jury)to take action, despite the Brutus's around.

The best understand that the script - message - is the least important piece of the experience. Most actors would tell you that the least enjoyable comment they could receive from an admiring audience member is, "How did you remember all those words?"
Instead, it has to do with moving the hearts and minds, especially into action.

Although it must be carefully focused, the attorney's message/script is only as important as the messenger. Yes, the facts must support the intention. However, without a connection to the listeners, a delivery that engages and a mindset focused on what's important, the message is lost.

Careful preparation, repetition and ownership contribute to the attorney's presence. But what tools and strategies support these actions? If the attorney is working on their own without the benefit of having any theatre training and keeping up with that craft, their focus goes simply to the message. This forces attention on only two things: facts and competition. Discovery, research, interviews, exhibits are the technical end. Relying on them to be the means to the end is short-sighted.

It's like an actor showing up with the right props, the right lines, at the right time in the chronological order of the storyline yet failing to listen, to react, or to breathe. The producer might as well print the entire script in the program.

The good news is, attorneys make a difference to juries when they take their time to connect, to deliver something memorable and clear and to stay focused on what's important. This comes from reviewing the artistic elements of courtroom presence. Practicing, committing to becoming effective, all on behalf of the client who needs their legal counselor to make a performance of their lifetime. Because of the impact on them, the client.

Clients want to know that when curtain's up in the courtroom, the butterflies they and their attorneys are experiencing is from excitement about their preparation which works into energy needed for them to stand and deliver.

5 Strategies of Managing Conflict

I discovered some great information recently after googling "5 Strategies of Managing Conflict". I knew the strategies yet wanted more perspective on using them. This is what I found from Wright State University.

Conflict Management Strategies Taken from Wright State University's College of Business
There is a menu of strategies we can choose from when in conflict situations:

Forcing - using formal authority or other power that you possess to satisfy your concerns without regard to the concerns of the party that you are in conflict with.
Accommodating - allowing the other party to satisfy their concerns while neglecting your own.
Avoiding - not paying attention to the conflict and not taking any action to resolve it.
Compromising - attempting to resolve a conflict by identifying a solution that is partially satisfactory to both parties, but completely satisfactory to neither.
Collaborating - cooperating with the other party to understand their concerns and expressing your own concerns in an effort to find a mutually and completely satisfactory solution (win-win).

Research on conflict management styles has found that each of us tends to use one or two of the above five strategies more than the others. For instance, some people predominantly use collaborating when in interpersonal conflict situations. In other words, although there are five different ways to handle conflicts, such a person is more likely to collaborate than they are to force, accommodate, avoid, or compromise. There are many advantages to using a collaborating strategy to handle interpersonal conflict situations. Collaborating with the other party promotes creative problem solving, and it's a way of fostering mutual respect and rapport.

However, collaborating takes time, and many conflict situations are either very urgent or too trivial to justify the time it takes to collaborate. There are many conflict situations that should be handled with one of the other four conflict management strategies rather than collaboration.

Managers who are very skilled at conflict management are able to (a) understand interpersonal conflict situations and (b) use the appropriate conflict management strategy for each situation.


Matching Strategies to Situations
There are a few key variables that define conflict management situations and determine which conflict management strategies are likely to be effective. Time pressure is an important variable--if there were never any time pressures, collaboration might always be the best approach to use. In addition to time pressures, some of the most important factors to consider are issue importance, relationship importance, and relative power:

Issue importance - the extent to which important priorities, principles or values are involved in the conflict.
Relationship importance - how important it is that you maintain a close, mutually supportive relationship with the other party.
Relative power - how much power you have compared to how much power other party has.

When you find yourself in conflict over very important issues, you should normally try to collaborate with the other party. But, if time is precious and if you have enough power to impose your will, forcing is more appropriate. Realize that you might need to repair the relationship after using a forcing strategy if the other party feels that you did not show adequate consideration for their concerns. Again, collaborating is normally the best strategy for handling conflicts over important issues.

When dealing with moderately important issues, compromising can often lead to quick solutions. However, compromise does not completely satisfy either party, and compromise does not foster innovation the way that taking the time to collaborate can. So, collaborating is a better approach to dealing with very important issues.

When you find yourself in conflict over a fairly unimportant issue, using an accommodating strategy is a quick way to resolve the conflict without straining your relationship with the other party. Collaborating is also an option, but it might not be worth the time.

Avoiding should normally be reserved for situations where there is a clear advantage to waiting to resolve the conflict. Too often, interpersonal conflicts persist and even worsen if there is no attempt to resolve them. Avoiding is appropriate if you are too busy with more important concerns and if your relationship with the other party is unimportant. However, if either the issue or the relationship between the parties is important, then avoidance is a poor strategy.

Inappropriate Strategy for Managing Self during Conflict

So last month I had my hair cut from the same guy at the same place I've been going to for the past two years. I like this guy because he knows how to cut thick hair and gives me a short cut I can rely on. It's just short enough that it's edgy, which reflects the confidence appearance I am after.

He and I have really developed an ability to talk openly about ourselves, which leads us each to look forward to our next visit. Hence, in the previous visit I shared my enthusiasm for going to Miami FL where I would be presenting two workshops for a firm's annual conference, enjoying the arrangements downtown Miami, and looking forward to my first major speaking engagement for a private group. So when Roger suggested I come in early the week of my departure for a complimentary "spruce up", I took him up on it.

That afternoon came and I added a massage to the time there, supporting a new associate who offers chair massage. Shoot, why not since this visit wasn't costing me anything? $15 was easy enough to afford. Of course the massage was enjoyable, which made my haircut even more enjoyable. But when Roger gave me back my credit card receipt after ringing me up I realized something was wrong. There was the cut and the massage listed, an amount I wasn't planning to spend. Additionally, I realized he had forgotten his complimentary offer to me.

Stunned, I said nothing. First, I didn't want to make a scene in his shop - which I wouldn't have made, had I addressed it correctly. And secondly, I decided that I was putting too much importance on the dollar. So I signed, and drove away.

My method for handling that conflict was avoidance. Eventually I let this scenario eat away at me, because I didn't like how I handled it. Which led me to call him. I knew if I didn't, I would begin to question Roger's actions, lose trust in him and no longer have the relationship I had. Simply because I didn't address the conflict using the appropriate strategy.

So I called him. He apologized for being so forgetful, took the charge off my bill and committed to making it up to me, all of which he has done.

This scenario is less about Roger and more about me. And the way I tend to manage conflict. Of the 5 strategies we could use to manage conflict, most of us use only one or two. Yet depending on the scenario, any of the 5 could be appropriate.

The strategy I used was avoidance. Now in some cases, avoidance works. When the other person is a relationship that doesn't matter to you or your focusing on things of more importance than the conflict issue. In my case, I couldn't stop thinking about the extra charge to my credit card. Trying to get my mind off it, I played cd's in my car, I focused on the traffic around me, but the scenario was unsettled in my head. I kept going back to the moment Roger charged me for both fees. Clearly this wasn't an avoidance-appropriate strategy issue. Additionally, Roger was an important relationship to me. I didn't want to distrust him, so I needed to give him the chance to address my concern.

The strategy I wanted to use but opted out of is Forcing him to rethink what he was doing or to hear the pre-arranged condition. For some reason I resisted, yet I see that under the time constraint of having to sign on the dotted line, it was the most appropriate strategy. Speak up!

Want to know about the 5 strategies, go to this link. It's good information. And it can save you some time, relationship and grief.

Finding difficulty understanding what's really at the core of the conflict? The information above won't help until you can objectively see what you're dealing with. In that case, contact me.

What Style Communicator are You?

There are 4 communication styles prevalent among us. Here is a brief overview of them. See which you can relate to. Then, determine who you most wish to be around. Let me know!



D - fast paced, demonstrative, the Doer. Likes decisive people, wants people to be confident and direct. Results are important to them.

I - fast paced, values feelings, the Interpersonal guru. Very social, wants people to like them. Image and reputation are important to them.

S - slow paced, a thinker, values independence, is Steady. Wants ease, peace and thinks distance and time are important to reflect.

C- slow paced, concerned about quality, is Credible. Asks questions that lead to proof, statistics, and process. Wants value.

Productive Networking Comes from Connecting

As with technology, when two business networking sources connect, power is unleashed.
Nothing tells this more readily than my networking meetings today.

A Columbus LinkedIn connection agreed to have coffee with me after I reached out by saying simply, "Hey, we're both in the LinkedIn GETDOT group and I don't think we've met. Want to?"

Being a relationship-driven guy, my contact agreed, invited me to join him at the Columbus Athletic Club and we had breakfast. I asked him how LinkedIn is working for him, had him share how he uses social media in general, and the next thing I knew he asked me about my business for a very special purpose. He was intrigued by the study of presentation techniques. Being a seasoned attorney, he is now paying attention to how to tweak his skills to win more cases and better support his clients.

As a result, he is introducing me to his professional peer group who all are looking to grow in areas I can help with!

Again at lunch today, another network acquaintance and I started discussing upcoming summer activities, then after I asked him to talk about his accomplishments for a bit, I was able to seek some guidance from him on a target market of mine whereupon he eventually invited me to write articles for the LinkedIn group he manages. Bingo -another successful meeting!

Finding the connection with people is key. And it's not as hard as it may appear. It includes observing the communication style they use and catering to it. Whether they are introvert or extrovert, people or task focused, connecting well is all about forgetting yourself and appreciating them for who they are.

For tips on the 4 communication styles, click on above title for a new blog link. Want some guidance in connecting while networking? Let me know :)

merri@bdbcommunication.com