Golden Practices

Social Media Risk Tolerance Quiz for Firms

I'm working on some risk assessment tools for firms to use to determine the level of rigidity (or lack thereof) needed in their own social media policies--and firms' likelihood, or not, of success in using social media tools to their full potential.

And I wholeheartedly believe that, while some potential risks exist (liability, etc), such policies are primarily anchored to the level of trust within an organization.

I like to keep things simple so I created a 3 question "Quiz" for firms to assess the strictness of their policies governing, well, everything--but particularly: Communication, Internet and Email Use, and Social Media Use.

Here's the quiz:

1. How important is autonomy among your firm’s values and current practices? (scale 1-5, 5 highest)
2. How important is innovation among your firm’s values and current practices? (scale 1-5, 5 highest)
3. To what degree does your culture demonstrate trust in, and respect of, employee judgment? (scale 1-5, 5 highest)

Results:

Add to determine your total score.

Score of 11-15 = SM usage can flourish in your firm because trust inspires people. A brief, mellow policy will be more than adequate and you won’t have to worry about hampering people’s enthusiasm with rigid, unfriendly policies. (samples: Baker & Daniels Mayo Clinic and Headset Bros )

Score of 6-10 = SM usage may be less than it could otherwise be. A tendency toward carefully worded, somewhat detailed policies convey the firm is wary or skeptical and somewhat concerned about being embarrassed by employees.(sample: Jaffe template Harvard Law and Microsoft)

Score of 1-5 = SM doesn’t fit well with your current culture. Very specific, restrictive policies probably suit your firm best. Look closely at the underlying reasons for your concerns and try to understand the root cause so you can work on building a more knowledge-worker-friendly environment. (I choose not to embarrass any orgs by listing them here, but these tend to exceed 2 pages, and include everything but the kitchen sink)

I invite your thoughts...

PS - hat tip to Social Media Governance for their excellent compilation of sample policies and to Ron Baker for his response to my questions on the subject which helped contribute to the direction of this brief quiz

When You Look at These Future CPAs, the Future of Accounting Looks Bright!

Gotta hand it to McGladrey! I was just hopping around the web and came upon a post to McGladrey's Success Starts Here blog.

They've posted about their 2009 Summer Intern Capstone Conference and, you know what, this video speaks for itself. It's upbeat and exciting. Just makes me feel good all over. :)

Watch it!

Policies for Emerging Technologies

This topic keeps coming up. People have differing comfort levels with newish technologies and therefore have very different tolerance levels for others using it.

True that some people just don't "get it" when it comes to being polite. The cell-phone screamers and mid-conversation texters or email-checkers come to mind.

The common reaction seems to be "We need a company policy for [fill in technology here]?"

For everything from listening to ipods (wrote "iPods Are Not the Enemy") and blogging ("Blogging Policies" post) to streaming video watching at work or accessing facebook, business leaders want policies. Especially accounting and law types. We want to control it!

I've written an article that was just published in Practical Accountant and WebCPA, but it applies across many industries. It's called, "Charting a Firm's Social Media & Communications Policy" and I hope you'll check it out. 

Basically it explores a facilitated session I led with managing partners to explore how to deal with emerging technology urging them to take the time to fully understand it... hopefully BEFORE cranking out a policy banning or stifling its use.

I just read lawyer Jay Shepherd's blog post on Gruntled Employees called Does Your Company Need a Smartphone Policy and he raises some of the same issues and links to three other terrific posts. My favorite is A Two-Word Corporate Blogging Policy.

Something you'll find in my article, above, is that getting the partners/owners on the same page about your policy approach, in order to make policies that make sense, requires giving them the opportunity to hash through what REALLY concerns them, and dealing with those concerns, rather than jumping to policy FIRST.

Social Media: The Unavoidable Intersection of Your Business & Personal Life

For those among you who have managed thus far to maintain good, solid compartmentalization between your business and your personal lives, I offer a hearty “Congratulations!”

Seriously. Not an easy thing to do these days. In fact, for some of us, we couldn’t cleanly sort the people in our lives into the two buckets of "business" and "friends" if our lives depended on it.

But this “blur” of personal and professional isn’t really a new thing, at all, is it?

For years, we've become friends with clients and friends become clients. Co-workers become like family. Sometimes they literally become family. It's not uncommon that lawyers/doctors wed other lawyers/doctors, etc. (With the hours some people put in, where the heck else would they meet anyone?? )

But now it’s in your face and soon to be, if not yet, in your employment policies: dealing with social media applications and the work day.

Collecting all your contacts in one place is complicated, too. There is the clear challenge of deciding how much of your personal side to bare to whom.

You might whip out pictures of your kids to show a colleague at a conference, but do you really want them seeing photos of you in your swimsuit chasing your kid (not pretty is my point)?

For those who want to dip their toe in the pool of the life/work blend (or who are already waist deep) and wishing for a way to be more selective about who sees what, you will probably appreciate this excellent “how to” on Facebook privacy through using “groups” for sorting your friends and business contacts. Read 10 Privacy Settings Every Facebook User Should Know.

I’ll briefly touch on policies, too. Frankly, as much as companies have tried over the last decade to stifle employee access of third party email sites, interactive websites, etc, it’s simply impossible to restrict the entire internet. Why bother to lock out hotmail/yahoo when people have email and text on their smart phones??

That era is over.

And it’s dumb to block most websites, too. Disallowing Linked In, Facebook, Blogs and Twitter (yes, some firms lock down all of those) is cutting off your firm’s nose to spite its face. These are valuable marketing tools for those who wish to use them that way.

But more discouragingly for the leery employer, if you ban them, smart people who like a challenge (there tend to be quite a few of those in the professional knowledge firm arena) will spend their time finding a way to circumvent the ban.

C’mon, you were teenagers...you remember the thrill of stretching or breaking a rule just to see if you could pull it off!

So, don’t spend a lot of energy worrying about who is using what forum and instead, if issues arise at the individual level with regard to performance, then address problems one-on-one with that individual. Worry about people not getting their work done is the real issue behind the bans, anyway, right?

Today's reality is that there is little choice now but to trust the way people spend their “time” is appropriate, overall, and simply hold people accountable for the end result: either they are cutting the mustard with performance, or they aren’t.

Good luck and happy entry to this new era of life/work management.

*Hat tip to the incomparable Debra Helwig (excellent new blog: Service Minded) for pointing me to the the Facebook Privacy article and its 239 useful comments

Best CPA Firms to Work For

Congrats to all the firms that made Accounting Today's 2008: The Best Accounting Firms to Work For (or in pdf with graphics).

Especially happy for the recognition of my friends at Mark Bailey & Co for ranking the #1 small firm to work for (any coincidence that the firm does not keep timesheets?).

Per the article:

Mark Bailey & Co. in Reno, Nev., Frazier & Deeter LLC in Atlanta, and Kaufman, Rossin & Co. in Miami garnered the first-place ranking in the small, midsized and large categories, respectively.

In all, five small firms, 40 midsized firms and 15 large firms were honored as Best Firms to Work For. They will be recognized at an awards ceremony in May.

How were these firms evaluated?

Identifying and recognizing the best employers in accounting was a joint effort of the publishers of Accounting Today and Best Companies Group.

...accounting firms with at least 15 employees...submitted an Employer Benefits and Policies Questionnaire to disclose company policies, practices and demographics, which made up one quarter of the firm's score.

Then staff members completed a confidential Employee Engagement and Satisfaction Survey, to evaluate the employees' workplace experience and company culture, which accounted for the remaining three quarters of each firm's score.

The results were then analyzed and categorized in eight areas: leadership and planning, corporate culture and communications, role satisfaction, work environment, relationship with supervisor, training and development, pay and benefits, and overall engagement.

Don't Just Recruit Cool, BE Cool

Rita Keller brings up being "cool" if a firm is going to remain competitive. I agree and expand the point to emphasize it's a two-parter!

The first step is attracting great people. The second and more important part (and much more difficult one) is inspiring them to want to STAY so your firm has the talent AND attitude to continue to do great things for clients.

Rita's post, "Do you speak their language" talks about texting. Specifically, texting used in an accounting firm's recruiting ad. And, sure, it's a clever ad. I don't know the firm, but I hope they have the second part down-pat, too.

Just this month, I've been privvy (with great disapproval) to several firms' conversations about their policies on ipods, text messaging, and so forth. Basically, they say "don't" because "it interferes with productivity." 

Funny. How many of those staffers jammed to their favorite tunes through every homework assignment they've had while they earned their grades that qualified them to join the firm. (Take yourself back a few years...there was definitely a stereo, maybe even a favorite record or cassette, cranked up while I did MY studies. How about you?)

Maybe they're just trying to tune out the office chatter-box so they can get some work done! (Is there a no office chatter-box policy??)

And when I spoke in June at the AAM conference about blogs, a number of attendees said their firms' internet security won't let them access blogs from the office!

A number of firms also deny access to Linked In, Facebook, YouTube and other social networking sites in order to "control timewasting." Blogs and social media tools facilitate some of the most effective marketing and networking going on these days. And firms are blocking them!!

This lockout occurs among roughly 25% of businesses, so it's not just accounting firms who are short-sighted. See David Meerman Scott for that figure on his excellent (and sad) post called "Facebook and YouTube blocked by paranoid corporations at their own peril."

A commenter on David's post says people take advantage and waste hours on the internet to which David wisely responds:

... it is a management issue, not a technology issue. If people mess around at work, it doesn't really matter if it is on Facebook, or chatting by the water cooler, or taking a three hour "shopping lunch". It's all the same - people not doing what they've been paid to do.

I would deal with the behavior. If required, fire the employee who is not working.

Amen.

At any rate, policies like these stink. Most contradict what firms are trying to claim they are: great places to work. These policies (attire, perfume, internet use, ipods...) are insulting because they treat every person on your team as the worst behaved child by making everyone "pay" for the sins of one or two who show poor judgment and ought to just receive a talking to, and maybe a boot, if the talk doesn't work.

I'm picking up Rita's post today because I want to reinforce, all the great "cool" recruiting in the world won't solve the talent crisis. The problem is people leaving once they came, they saw, and they experienced. A lot of firms DO have amazing and cool cultures. And those firms are not seeing the turnover like the ones who get uptight about ipods and blog-reading.

Treat all the people like grown-ups and if some don't choose to act like it, then deal with them individually! But stop punishing the masses or you won't have a mass...there are too many other places for them to go.

It's time to get with the program.

High Satisfaction Day (HSD)

My friend Ron Baker taught me about HSDs. HSDs are the days when something happens that makes you swell with sense of accomplishment and think, "this is why I do what I do!" - your raison d'être.

Ron credits John Heymann, founder of NewLevel Group in Napa, CA, as the creator the High Satisfaction Day (HSD) term which Ron wrote about in one of his books: Measure What Matters to Customers.

Some companies and firms encourage employees to note their HSDs on a calendar in the employee lounge. Others, like Brendon Harrex's accounting firm, use technology to capture HSDs with a computer desktop button that, when pressed, launches a celebration fanfare and notes, somewhere, who had an HSD today.

Companies can keep an eye on increases or decreases in HSDs to get a sense of morale or personal fulfillment. This is why Ron calls it a KPI: or Key Predictive Indicator. No HSDs could imply an unhappy team member...someone who may not enjoy their job, or want to stay.

Anyway, Ron recently posted one of his HSDs which inspired me to post my best HSD ever. It's an email I received in May from a new client's lovely wife (edited a little for privacy) after my first project with the firm.

Michelle,

I just wanted to send a quick note to let you know that, even though you aren’t aware of it, you’ve made a tremendous difference in my life in the last few weeks!! It seems funny because we don’t really even know that much about each other, but I wanted you to know how much I appreciate you and your professional contribution to the marketing efforts at M's firm.

M is so proud of the proposal for the [prospect] project and having made the transition to having a product like that get out the door in such a short time was HUGE! Sometimes it’s nice to have input from “outside” .... M thinks the world of you and feels very lucky to have such a valuable resource for the firm.

Needless to say, he is a much more relaxed husband this weekend and of course that makes me a much happier wife!!

Anyway, I hope that you have time to spend with your family this holiday weekend and that the weather where you are is better than the cold and rain that we have here this weekend! I truly enjoyed your stay here with us and I do hope that we have more opportunities to share and get to know each other better in the near future.

Sincerely, J

Having positively impacted the family life of a client is probably the most important thing I've ever accomplished as a consultant. This, to me, was the ultimate compliment...definitely reminded my why I love doing what I do. And it feels good to share!

Can you think of your most recent or best HSD? We'd love to see what inspires you and makes you feel rewarded!

If you don't have a blog, feel free to post your HSD in a comment to this blog post. If you do have a blog, consider posting your HSD on it (trackback here, if you like).

Also, if you want to participate in a meme on it, here's a starting list to add to your post:

Ron Baker's HSD
Michelle Golden's HSD

"Are Employees Really an Audience?"

With permission, I post an e-newsletter article by a St Louisan in the PR profession, Les Landes. Les also recently started a blog called "Inside Out" which addresses "aligning marketing communications with employee engagement."

(I'm kinda proud of Les' entering the blogosphere because I helped introduce him to blogs at my presentation for the International Association of Business Communicators St Louis Chapter meeting awhile back!)

Anyway, here's his e-newsletter article:

Are Employees Really an Audience?

A few years ago, The Journal of Employee Communication Management published an article entitled "Employees Are Not an Audience." It was written by Glynn Young, who currently heads the Issues, Employee and Electronic Communications function for Monsanto Company. His basic premise is simple yet significant - the job of organizational communicators should NOT be mainly to create and deliver messages to the employee audience, but rather to facilitate conversations within the employee community.

That distinction is more than an exercise in semantics. It goes to the heart of why organizations struggle - and often fail - to generate meaningful employee engagement. It also explains why organizations get caught in the wrongheaded notion that they need better "two-way" communication.

Seriously - is there any other kind? Bottom line, if it isn't two-way, it isn't communication. It's message distribution.

Community of Professionals
Even if we're not conscious of it, we know in our guts that employees shouldn't be treated as an audience when it comes to communication. Just look at another metaphor often used for them - team. Can you imagine how Michael Jordan or Tom Brady or Albert Pujols or other sports team members would react if their organizations communicated with them like an "audience?" Pretty weird, huh?

But they're different, right? After all, those people are "professionals." Consider for a moment, though, how an organization might run its business and communicate with its employees differently if they viewed employees as a "community of professionals" - professional accountants, professional order entry clerks, professional maintenance workers, professional production line workers -- and so on? You get the picture.

Sure, the challenges are different when you're communicating with 12 to 50 people instead of 12,000 to 50,000. But the need for people to feel that their organizations are communicating with them as professional members of a team is much the same.

Shifting from Messages to Conversations
Admittedly, logistics are more complex with larger groups, and the options for communicating differ from one organization to the next depending on numerous factors. What's more, truly interactive communication simply isn't possible in all circumstances. If the building is on fire, for example, that's no time to engage an employee discussion group in considering various options on how to respond.

Still, organizations of any size and circumstance can and should shift from "sending messages" to "facilitating conversations" wherever possible by operating on two basic principles:

1. Stop using the phrase "communicate to," and replace it with "communicate with." If the best you can do is send a message, say so - but don't call it communication.

2. Where it's feasible and appropriate, frame "messages" as "conversation points," and create systematic ways for employees to converse and provide feedback on those topics.

While those principles are important for everyone in management to understand, it's vital for people in charge of internal communications to follow them if they want to get employees truly engaged and strengthen working relationships within the "employee community."

Les has an impressive list of communications of interest to people who understand that appreciation and respect of human capital is especially critical for firms who rely on Knowledge Workers. I hope you'll enjoy his messages as much as I do.

Creative and Edgy Attracts

I'm so behind in blogging. Seriously. And I know I don't actually have to tell you that. The beauty of blogs is that you, the reader, don't really know all the things I've been meaning to post and haven't yet. Except that, um, now you know.

So now that I've blown that facade completely, let me share some things worth checking out!

1. The all-around BEST website legal disclaimer you've ever seen (you'd sort of expect that from a law firm, but JUST WAIT...) is that of Valorem Law Group. Exactly what I love about Pat Lamb...

2. We've been looking at a lot of career pages on professional firm websites and absolutely LOVE the presentation of the interactive office walkthrough over at Quinn Emanuel.

3. We also love the MySpace approach over at Choate! My favorite is the bouncing ball video.

4. And would you expect anything less than edgy humor and creativity from a law firm that's comfortable with the nickname "MoFo"? I think not. I love their @$%#@! {Pigeonholed} page and their Why Mofo? page

Have you noticed these are all law firms. Ahem. Okay accountants, time to relax and let your creative juices flow!

Contrast the above with this type of video from PwC (who does do some edgy stuff, too) but you'll see their message is good but they are totally serious and low energy. Hmmm.

Any that you like?

Internal Mentoring Programs: The Wrong Approach

This post is for professional service firms who are thinking of starting a mentoring program or who have one and are wondering why it's not a brilliant success.

Assigning mentors doesn't work. And internal mentoring programs are rife with problems.

If you joined your firm before so-called 'mentoring programs' were all the rage, answer the following questions:

1. Who were/are your mentors?
2. Were they within the organization in which you worked or were they outside of it?
3. Did you select them or did they select you? (I'd bet money that no one assigned them to you)

Can a real mentor be selected by anyone but you anymore than your spouse ought to be chosen by someone other than you? (Yeah, I know that this is still done in various cultures, but how often does it work out really, really well?)

Your mentor was probably someone you encountered somewhere in your journey other than your present workplace. And I’d venture to guess that your mentor was somebody who saw promise in you and mutually admired them, and you clicked.

Mentoring is a relationship. Whether you initiated it or they did, at some point you asked their advice and they gave it. And whether you realized it or not, you also brought something to the relationship that they enjoyed. The relationship blossomed and you came to deeply value their opinions, their counsel, and maybe even their approval.

MENTEES...

Being mentored takes an open-mindedness that can only be “heartfelt” and never "required."

It requires a blend of respect for the mentor and trust that when you expose your vulnerability (because you must in order to grow with the guidance of a mentor), they will protect it and won’t judge it, exploit it, or broadcast it.

MENTORS...

Being a mentor requires a sincere desire to help the mentee succeed. It requires seeing in the mentee that ‘special something’ that they want to foster. And it is not something that can be done half-heartedly. As much as the mentee must have genuine desire for the mentor's guidance, the mentor cannot fake or feign his or her role.

Mentoring isn’t something that can be done once a month over a lunch hour. And “progress” can’t be measured objectively. It has to be judged.

MENTORING WITHIN A FIRM

When a mentor and mentee work together in a direct or indirect reporting relationship (ie the mentor has influence over compensation and advancement), there are barriers for either party to be totally “real” with each other, not the least of which is a mentee's desire for advancement and the fear that weaknesses will be held against him at promotion time.

Further, when one’s boss is the mentor, a mentee can be perceived as “a pet employee” because the boss “protects” him or her (a natural role for a mentor). It doesn’t serve either person well among his/her peers when the mentor could be viewed as displaying favoritism and the mentee perceived as a brown-noser--a label which can be unfairly applied when a direct report becomes "close" to a boss.

Having a mentor within one’s company is risky and is generally not very appealing to the mentee. Selecting a mentor outside of one's company alleviates these concerns and provides a level of objectivity the mentee really needs from her mentor.

How the mentor/mentee are paired is becomes quite problematic. Assigning can’t work. That respect/care and trust/vulnerability has to be heartfelt and real.

Some firms think they get around this by "letting" their team members select their mentor from among the partners or managers.

What typically happens is that the same few people the firm are chosen by all, and nobody selects the others. Ouch. Feelings get hurt. And damage is done because it's apparent who's "looked up to" and who isn't. And the chosen few are overwhelmed and they really aren’t inspired to mentor a ton of people (if any at all). 

SEMANTICS?

It seems to me that firms are confusing apprenticeship, or the role of preceptor, with “mentoring.”

I don’t think these are the same as mentoring. I could be wrong. I think what you are actually wanting to accomplish is KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER.

Maybe all this is semantics, but it seems to me that words do matter. I think having a forced internal initiative that you call a “mentoring program” is simply fodder for frustration on everyone’s part. It's pretty much a waste of time and energy. And it's kind of insulting to boot.

In other words, it's very possibly delivering the reverse of the effect you desire. Most “mentoring programs” fall flat in firms--considered laughable by the team members and dreaded by the leadership.

It is probably transfer of knowledge that is the most needed and least attended aspect of the continuity of a professional practice.

INSTEAD

Instead, I would recommend one of two approaches:

1.  Do create a mentoring program but encourage people to find a career/business mentor “anywhere.”  Identify him/her, ask them to be their mentor (a good classic post on this over at Escape From Cubicle Nation), see if the person is into it, connect regularly, and then, in the firm, get together as a group periodically to discuss the experience and share a recent learning.

Perhaps if someone doesn’t want to seek out a mentor, perhaps they will seek out a mentee (again, “anywhere”) and they, too, can share their learnings. A purpose of this would be to show that you value REAL mentoring and that you believe it is important for everyone to have someone who is a career mentor for them.

2. Set up an “apprenticeship program” instead if that is what you are really after (teaching people judgment, behaviors and skills) and create learning goals and objectives. Again, transfer of knowledge is the most needed and least attended aspect in the professions.

Unlike a "mentoring program," an "apprenticeship program" doesn't imply that you have to seek a person's career guidance and advice, but it does imply that the junior person can identify traits and skills to admire and emulate from VARIOUS leaders in the firm. And leaders can identify, from each other, traits and skills to OFFER and give, as a gift, to their team members.

IN CLOSING

Successful people do have mentors (whether the mentor knows that s/he serves this role or not!). But they select their own or really just evolve into the relationship. It's actually a pretty natural behavior for humans and typically begins with admiration and respect.

Let's call things what they really are and work on knowledge transfer as its own effort without trying to force the issue of internal mentoring where it is complicated with politics. Mentoring is best left to individual choice.

Gear Up for the Next Interview Season

An interesting post at HR World talks about "30 Interview Questions You Can't Ask and 30 Sneaky, Legal Alternatives to Get the Same Info"

What I don't like about the post is the title. It presents the article in a light that the content doesn't follow, which brings us to what I do like about the post.

I like the fact that the authors encourage getting past the presumed cause questions (not allowed) and takes the interviewer to the real reasons one is asking the questions.

For instance, asking about religious persuasion is nosy and, clearly, not allowed. But if the purpose is to determine availability to work, say, Sunday mornings, then the author says to just ask if there would be any problems working the weekend hours.

As one commenter wrote:

The title made me think that it would be about how to ask slimy questions in a legal way, but I thought it was actually reasonable and helpful. I would much rather tell potential employers that I am available to work any day of the week than tell them that I am an atheist.

Anyway, I cannot attest to the accuracy of the advice (I'm far from an HR expert) but the article seems reasonable and informative about some of the legalities any employer probably needs to know.

Law Students Building a Better Profession

An excellent blog came to my attention today (hat tip to Ron Baker and Stephanie West Allen). The blog's purpose is noble indeed:

Law Students Building a Better Legal Profession is a group of students from across the country dedicated to helping law firms and lawyers recommit to a legal profession devoted to effective and efficient client service, to lawyers as people, and to the roots of our profession in service. 

We are working to ensuring that practicing law does not mean giving up a commitment to family, community, and dedicated service to clients. By advocating for reforms to law firms we hope to help keep law both a business and a profession to be proud of.

Take, for instance, their insightful post entitled "Costs to the Profession" in which they provide excellent examples and citations (would you expect any less from law students?) for costs of the current system to Clients, Firms, Attorneys, and Community. This is a MUST READ post.

Another excellent post is "The Real Losers Are Associates" wherein ramifications are discussed to the rising associate salaries. After framing the issue of excalating salaries forcing increases to already high billable hour requirements, they refer to inhouse counsel reactions to crazily-high hourly rates.

“At some point, we’ll say we don’t want any associates on our matters,” said Steve Hantler, DaimlerChrysler A.G.’s assistant general counsel for government and regulatory matters.

The reaction of the bloggers is key (emphasis mine):

Uh-oh.  Many of us go to law firms — at least in part — for the training opportunities.  But students don’t expect to be taken off of matters because we’re too expensive. 

Are we really being billed out at rates clients can’t accommodate?

Should law students take this into account when choosing a firm?

Um, "yes" and "probably so."

I'm delighted to see this blog and see the richness of fresh eyes and thinking on these matters. You can read more on this group at Law.com in "Students Seek a More Reasonable Law Firm Life."

If you hire talented people--or want to--and wish for them to stick around after you hire them, I have three recommendations:

1. I'd strongly recommend you read Law Students Building a Better Legal Profession regularly to stay in touch with the thinking of bright professionals.
2. I also recommend that you frequently and fruitfully 'think about' how to improve your firm in these areas that matter tremendously.
3. My third recommendation is to attend VeraSage Institute's meeting on Oct 22 in Las Vegas. We've made it ultra-affordable so price is no barrier--VeraSage operates as a non-profit entity. It's only $129 and the Rio's room rates are running less than that per night.

Fact is, in order to solve the problems these law students so articulately bring to the forefront, some serious innovation is needed.

At the VeraSage meeting, you will meet and learn from the most innovative law firm CEO in the United States, Christopher Marston of Exemplar Law Partners. Despite being described as a meeting for young professionals, it is really a meeting for INNOVATIVE and open-minded professionals of any age.

Register for the event

Stopping the Leak: Attrition in the Professions is Getting Ugly

The legal and accounting professions are leaking like sieves.

In law, there's an 85% attrition rate of professionals who are abandoning the entire profession in their first five years. The public accounting profession is not far behind (about 65-70%, we estimate).

Among those who stay in their firms, an alarming number express no desire to become owners or partners in the business.

VeraSage Institute operates as a non-profit organization that wants to stop this flow of great people out of what could be much more interesting and fulfilling professions. IF a few things are fixed. VeraSage, therefore, is offering its first ever program geared especially for those YOUNG PROFESSIONALS who are feeling discouraged about their choice of profession.

If you feel disenchanted and wonder whether you should leave accounting or law, you MUST go to this one-day session led by two amazing young leaders of Firms of the Future: Chris Marston and Brendon Harrex. (I've written about both guys before). A majority of other VeraSage fellows and founders--from all over the world--will be there as well including me.

VeraSage just posted registration details. Don't miss this OCT 22 event in easy-to-get-to Las Vegas.

The Future is Already Here...It's Just Unequally Distributed

For a profession to be truly innovative, it must not only do new things, it must stop doing old things. It is not possible to create tomorrow without first getting rid of yesterday.

You know there has to be a better way. And there is.

Attend THE event young professionals have been crying out for--given directly by the leaders of two REAL, practicing, thriving Firms of the Future--one law firm and one accounting firm.

Brendon Harrex, 33 year-old founder of the Harrex Group in Gore, New Zealand, and Chris Marston, 31 year-old founder of Exemplar Law Partners in Boston, MA, are revolutionizing the way professional knowledge firms are led.

Brendon and Chris are two of the professions' most visionary leaders because they understand they attract knowledge workers, and therefore treat their employees radically different than the average firm: No billable hour quotas, no timesheets required, investment in education quadruple the average firm, autonomy to set your own schedule, and time set aside to pursue to your passions. Each has a waiting list of people who want to join their organizations!

Brendon and Chris understand that professional knowledge workers sell intellectual capital, not time. They don't treat their people like union employees or children who have to account for every six minutes of their day. You are not galley slaves on the SS Billable Hour, but human capital investors who deserve to be treated with respect, autonomy, and dignity. They also know the partnership model is broken and they each have innovated new ways of running the businesses of their firms.

In addition to Brendon and Chris, many of the VeraSage Founders and Senior Fellows (from 30 to 65 years of age...all doing value pricing and ALL operating without timesheets) will be on hand to share their experiences and answer your questions.

Come hear, from the horses mouths, what the future of the accounting and legal professions looks like. If you're discouraged in your "traditional" firm or wondering why you chose your profession in the first place, this is the knowledge and inspiration you need in order to reinvigorate your career.

This high-energy event promises to be extraordinary because it's the first--and maybe ONLY--time VeraSage will simultaneously feature these young leaders of true Firms of the Future. Several other Senior Fellows of VeraSage comprise a panel to field audience questions about converting a traditional firm or starting their own Firm of the Future.

The future of the profession lies in firms led by innovative individuals. If you want a sneak preview of the improved and exciting future your profession, don't miss VeraSage Institute's Inaugural Young Professional Program.

• 8:30 a.m.- 5 p.m.
• Lunch on your own from 12-1 p.m.
• October 22, 2007
• Rio All-Suite Casino Resort
• 3700 West Flamingo Road
• Las Vegas, NV 89103
• 702.252.7628

Seating is limited to 100. Secure your spot and register now for only $129. (Priced low as possible so you can afford it even if your firm won't pay...)

Accounting and Legal News Media, you need to be there, too. This is truly ground-breaking and if you don't report it, you are going to be missing the boat. Media representatives (or anyone for that matter) can call me directly for more information about this program. Or ask your questions on VeraSage.com.

Recruiting Magnets: Firms of the Future

There's so much more to this story than the recruiting angle. This story is about the future of professional service firms.

But now that I have your attention let me tell you about Brendon Harrex, a senior fellow of VeraSage Institute. He's another innovator turning the professional firm business model upside down!

Brendon, at the age of 31, became the first Chief Value Officer (ever) in his 100-person accounting firm. This means HE was solely in charge of ALL pricing. Read more about this in Ron Baker's post Who's In Charge of Value in Your Firm? where he describes Brendon's role:

If you worked at Ward Wilson, a four-office, ten-partner, one-hundred team member firm in Invercargill, New Zealand, your answer would be Brendon Harrex, who was recently appointed Chief Value Officer, responsible for creating and capturing value across the entire firm. Brendon, at age 31, is the youngest partner in the firm, and is an amazing visionary, bringing leadership not only to his firm, but our entire profession.

Then, at age 33, Brendon was elected chairman of Ward Wilson--the firm had amazing vision. But it also had aging partners who, apparently, were more concerned with their retirement than with the posterity of the profession (my words, not Brendon's!).

Ward Wilson sold to a consolidator. Brendon's window of opportunity opened and he bought out one of WW's offices, the one he led before becoming Chairman. Below is the e-mail he shared with Ron Baker and me about this.

His brilliant ad (pictured, click to enlarge) says:

"If you have get up and go and know you should have got up and left before now, consider the Harrex Group."

Now Brendon has a WAITING LIST of future employees who WANT to come work for him. Read on, the emphasis is mine:

Better Jobs and Better Places to Work

Recently learned about Jobs in the Money, a blog on jobs and career management for accounting and financial professionals. Check it out. It's written by Mark Feffer and Jon Jacobs of www.JobsintheMoney.com and www.efinancialcareers.com.

While the accounting profession goes through shifts to adapt culturally to new generations and to grapple with shortage of talent and waning interest in the partnership model, there is sure to be heightened interest in related careers.

I'm not promoting for young people to flee the profession, but heck, alternatives are out there and young professionals already know about them. So firms better perk their ears and take some action.

How, firms might ask? Step 1 - get open-minded.

My friend Ron Baker was at a conference recently where he met the two women who are responsible for ROWE - Results-Only Work Environment (their company is Culture Rx) that I wrote about awhile back on the VeraSage blog related to success that Best Buy had with ROWE.

Ron's subsequent post hits on a core issue young people have with the professions: time and results are completely unrelated. For the client or the company. Ron's post is called "Why People With No Talent Love Timesheets."

Though his title is meant to spark anger among supporters of the billable hour, the truths embedded in Ron's message cannot be ignored. Time and results are not related. Ever had an employee sit around and do nothing while on the clock? Ever feel unproductive yourself during the workday? Cases in point.

The Culture Rx people have recently launched a blog that is very interesting and will no doubt prove to be viewed as "controversial" by the conservative professions of accounting and law. We'll see. The blog is also called Culture Rx.

Do you have all the great people you need? Maybe. But it's not what I'm hearing from firm to firm.

So do you want really good people to really WANT to work at your firm? Do something about it. First step, start with an open mind.

Autonomy and Excelling, A Powerful Correlation

A lovely illustration of why micromanaging behaviors (including timesheets!) should be avoided at all costs. As Kathy Sierra (author of the wildly popular Creating Passionate Users blog) so wisely puts it:

"The more you use your reins, the less they'll use their brains."

See her whole post on micromanagement where she begins:

If you asked 100 managers which they'd prefer--employees who think, or mindless zombies who respond only (and exactly) as ordered, you'd get 100 responses of, 'What a ridiculous question. We hire smart people and stay out of their way so they can do their jobs.' And if you asked 100 managers to define their management style, none would claim to be micromanagers. Probe deeper, though, and the truth begins to emerge. 

And then she offers ways to determine if you are a micromanager and what to do if you are one or have one. Great stuff!

It's a self-fulfilling prophecy:  In case after case, it is evident that when you trust people to do well, they'll do everything in their power to show you that your trust is well-placed. But if you hold seeds of doubt as to their capabilities, they'll prove that, too.

(same as with kids...think about it, it's true!)

Who Makes Accounting Fun?

My friend Ed Kless (who works for Sage and is a fellow Fellow of VeraSage) promotes the Xerox notion, furthered by David Maister, that:

Employee Satisfaction -->  Customer Satisfaction -->  Increased Profitability (or at least, as Ed says, "Financial Performance")

If it's true, if Employee Satisfaction leads to the performance result, why don't we spend more time innovating in this area?  I think this chain is absolutely true because, quite frankly, you cannot give truly great service if you are miserable in your job.

Just look at Southwest Airlines' people versus, say, oh, any other airline...
or Disney people compared to Six Flags...
or The Container Store people compared to Organized Living...

So, is accounting fun? Does the profession "connect" with today's under 35 crowd?  Not much. But here are two cool examples!

1 - Did you know that the Maryland Association of CPAs has a presence on Second Life? Oh, and did I mention MACPA has a blog?? H&R Block and some firms are involved in Second Life, too. Interesting to keep an eye on, for sure--and a lot of work to do it right...let's see how they do.

2 - Did you know that the Hong Kong Institute of CPAs has a 2-minute music video called "Tute in Da House"? Fantastic!

Now, compare Tute in Da House with Ernst & Young's "Oh Happy Day" video... (pretty long, but the first minute conveys the whole concept).

Which is more cool? Which is more fun? How about more authentic? Which people would you rather work with?

What will your firm do to be more fun?  What should the profession do?

hat tip to Lyne Noella for the HKI video...

It's Official. Demand Outweighs Supply.

Some call this news story "good" but I call it unfortunate. Well, maybe the publicity is good...

Accounting made #1 on a list (in Am City Bizjournals) of most desired grads. It's official, accounting is hurting more than every other sector when it comes to needing qualified, interested people.

Demand officially outweighs supply. Dare I say the future we've worried about is here.

Bizjournals are reporting:

The number of new college grads hired by the service sector is expected to increase by 19.8 percent this year, based on National Association of Colleges and Employers' [NACE--a human-resources organization] findings.

Hot employment fields for grads

Employers are on the lookout this year for graduates holding the following bachelor's degrees, according to the NACE survey. They are listed in order of anticipated demand:

1. Accounting

2. Business administration and management

3. Computer science

4. Electrical engineering

5. Mechanical engineering

6. Information sciences and systems

7. Marketing and marketing management

8. Computer engineering

9. Civil engineering

10. Economics and finance

So, what can we do to make this profession more attractive? (to those in it as well as those thinking about it...)

We have people fleeing public accounting almost as fast as law (new lawyer defections are approx 85% in the first 5 years)--yet the law school pipelines are generating plenty more--not so with accountants.

And in accounting, we have people with 8, 9, 10 or more years of experience with ZERO desire to ever be owners in their firms.

Is it time to look at and try new ownership models? 
(Some of us think the traditional partnership model is broken.)

Explore a new "practice" equation, perhaps?
(My friend Ron Baker, author of Firm of the Future, explains the New and the Old Practice Equations, in this National Law Journal interview transcript.)

What will it take to open firms' eyes to the fact that it is time to do something other than let this become the next generation's problem. Let's work on improving the posterity of this profession!

Fly On The Wall #5: It's Not Us. All About Sam.

This isn't one firm, it's many. This happens several times a year.

A partner calls to tell me, "Sam is leaving...just gave notice...."  Sam is typically going to another firm or into industry.

Sam is a key player. Male or female, Sam is usually an associate or more senior "staff" person. Someone with 3-6 years of experience. A solid up-and-comer. Someone we all had high hopes for.

I'll get the call because Sam was an integral part of the development of a practice group. Sam is usually a pretty decent marketer...gets it. Understands service and relationships. Knows what it takes to make and keep a client happy. And a good enough technician to lead more junior people.

Partners rely on Sam and clients trust Sam. Sam was damn good at a lot of things. Everybody spoke well of Sam.

No one ever said Sam was perfect (no Sam ever is...) but Sam was probably going to be a partner, maybe even the next partner. Nobody had a problem with that...they were glad. Sam was good for the firm.

The firm is a decent firm. Good people who are well-meaning. Average pay. But a typical firm in the sense that deadlines are many and positive feedback is rare. Culture is decent but delegation, training, and mentoring aren't what they ought to be and the partners know they should work on this.

Sam was hope and promise for the firm's next generation. The younger team members looked up to Sam and Sam mentored them. It's a crying shame that Sam left.

It's what happens after Sam leaves that I'm writing about today.

People are heard saying, "Sam wasn't all that good, anyway." Sam <gasp> made some mistakes now and then. Sam could have been better. We'll get by without Sam. No big deal.

Truth? Or sour grapes?

You lose one Sam and maybe it IS just Sam. After all, if Sam got itchy, and no one even saw it coming, something wasn't right. Sam might have been a disloyal, untrustworthy bum. So, okay, it was Sam and not the firm.

But firms tend to lose a lot of Sams. How do I know? Partly because I get a good number of these calls.

But I also know this because lots of firms (across the accounting and legal professions) say they don't have successors. They report that, among their most senior people, none are really strong leaders or "partner material."

It doesn't seem to occur to the firms that they've had lots of Sams over the years, but the Sams were the most ambitious of their people. The most innovative. And the most antsy. They moved on.

Could the Sams see that there wasn't the type of opportunity for entrepreneurial leadership that they hoped for within the firm? Or the timeframe they desired? Could they see that firms are resistant to change and likely to do things the same way they've always been done?

In some firms, all the Sams have moved on. The Sams, being the most leadership-oriented team members, moved on and left the more laid-back, content non-Sams behind. The non-Sams are least likely to want to lead or to develop business.

If this has happened in your firm, don't be unreasonably disappointed in the people who remain. It's not that you have a bad lot--these non-Sam types are necessary, too. It's just that you've lost 'balance' in your mix or blend. Losing the more outgoing performers leaves you with the more steady, calm do-ers.

Moral(s) of the story:

If you lose more than one Sam every couple years, or if you tend to lose your Sams at about the same point in their career, it's probably you, not them. If you're in such a situation, it's most likely a result of one or more characteristics of your firm's culture. It's not usually money.

It's awfully easy to let feelings of betrayal and disappointment about Sam departures lull you into a "well, we didn't want them anyway" mindset. But this defensive mentality prevents you from learning what you need to know to make sure you don't keep losing Sams!

Look carefully at why they're leaving. Try to be open to other perspectives on what it's like to work and build a career in your firm. Understand and accept the REAL reasons people leave.

Then do what you need to do to provide the environment and culture that inspires your Sams to stay, grow, and eventually lead.

3 Positive Ways to Impact Your Firm

In a heavy conversation the other day with a friend who is also in the consulting profession, we reflected on how lawyers and accountants, through their associations, continuing education, and even with their consultants, have belabored much of the same 'stuff' for more than 20 years.

They (you...we...) worry about, ponder, and hear recommendations about, the same 'ol issues and concerns--yet they still go unresolved. These are things like recruiting, retention, cross-selling, profitability, succession, new business development, etc.

Look at the topics of most conferences, seminars, and roundtables and you'll see the same subjects over and over and over. Year after year.

So, we wondered...

• are firms going to session after session on the same topic in hopes of hearing a recommendation that is "easier" or less painful?
• is it that most firm leaders don't want resolution enough to actually take action? (ah, maybe retirement isn't that far away...and it will be the next generation's problem to solve...)
• how much is just plain overwhelm?
• or, maybe, could it be that the problems discussed are symptoms and not the real illness?

We also agreed there are some big problems that don't get talked about much. They are pooh-poohed or  swept under the rug and avoided all together.

My friend asked, "What do you think could most positively impact firms in the next 10-20 years?"

Not an easy question (and my crystal ball is in the shop) but after thinking awhile, I offered these three things:

1. Morale
2. Forethought and Reflection
3. Differentiation

Though they look small, they are not.

MORALE has dramatic impact on customer service and longevity not to mention its benefit for personnel.

Job enjoyment, magnetizing the firm to attract more and better talent, and energy toward learning and excelling--the desire for people to go out of their way to impress each other--are all tremendous results of great morale.

Much of the delegation problem is trust and training based. Great morale creates the behaviors that increase trust. Don't underestimate this as a core goal for your firm and better!