Driven: Part 4, or Believing Isn't Necessarily Seeing

OMG it's been f-o-r-e-v-e-r since I posted last, where have I been?

I've been here!

Pretty, eh? 

Plus when I haven't been frolicking in the desert, I've been Crazy Busy.

Enough of that, onward with the thoughts I've been thinking while reading Daniel Pink’s Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us.

The farther I read in this provocative book, the more I realize that it has vast implications for virtual paralegals such as me, and  for all other freelance or telecommuting workers.

I’ve seen a lot of articles suggesting that trust is a barrier to telecommuting or remote working relationships. That managers, supervisors, and business owners who hire contractors worry about the work getting done when no supervisor is present to watch it happening.

This is the exact opposite of what I experience, and I'm guessing it is the opposite of what all of my virtual colleagues experience too.

The notion that a remote working contractor, such as a virtual paralegal, won’t work when not being watched operates on the old assumptions that people don’t really want to work, and must be driven to by carrots and sticks. An assumption that doesn’t really bear out when people are interested in what they’re doing, and have a deep personal investment in what they're doing.

In fact, the very reason that many freelancers want to be self-employed and want to work remotely is that autonomy is very important to us, and it is also highly motivating. The control I wield over when and how I work is an integral part of my drive to excel.

I've commented in previous posts about the way in which carrots and sticks can warp our natural motivation to work hard. Studies show that in a work environment where workers know they are being monitored to assure they’re performing, they may actually slack if monitoring stops. The goal can shift from performing the work to appearing busy for the ever watchful boss. So I can see how managers – lawyers in my case – could become programmed to believe workers require monitoring to get them to perform.

But a self-employed person, someone owning her own business and responsible for her own income, benefits, livelihood and well-being, is really operating outside such an environment. She has strong motivation to perform and to exceed expectations that has nothing to do with being monitored.

Now I’m not suggesting that it’s impossible for a remote working professional to slack off and charge clients for not working – obviously there are unscrupulous folks around. I'm simply saying that for me, the motivation to do my best and most efficient work stems from my love of what I'm doing, from the exhilarating sense of pride I feel from owning a business that provides services to clients, and from the knowledge that it's the value I provide that keeps clients coming back, whether they can see me working or not.

Always Be Teaching

Lee Rosen, in his insightful blog Divorce Discourse, had a couple of great posts a while back (here and here) about the importance of cultivating a culture in a law office in which everyone teaches others how to do what they do, and everyone learns what others are doing. Every employee, from partner down to receptionist, should be both teacher and student. This appeals to me on many levels:

First, because it means that everyone understands the value of another’s job, which fosters mutual respect.

Second, because we hone and finetune our own knowledge and expertise as we think about how to share it with others.

Third, because this culture of teaching helps instill shared values about excellent service to clients, teamwork and courtesy.

And finally, it appeals to me because it means that no one is indispensable or irreplaceable, and that is a good thing. When some young staff member goes off to law school, someone else knows the status of her projects and can keep them moving. Perhaps anyone in the office is equipped to help a new client with an info packet, and filling out paperwork. And everyone knows how to make a photocopy in a pinch.

When I worked in BigLaw, I loved to mentor junior staff. I wanted to teach them what I knew about procedure; I wanted to impart knowledge about how to manage a case. I wanted to share best practices on how to approach projects. And I frequently found myself learning from them how to do something more efficiently! This happened in particular when younger, tech savvy staff quickly grasped and then taught me how to streamline a database search, or had new ideas about organization.

And I appreciated the time many lawyers took to mentor me about their philosophy of a case or a motion or a discovery task, and showed me exactly how they wanted something done.

Now as a virtual and freelance paralegal, I am constantly learning from clients their preferred procedures, and their understanding of and goals for their cases. And I sometimes find myself in a position of teaching them about a new technology too.

And while opportunities to share my knowledge with fellow legal support staff don't crop up every day as they did when I worked in a law office, I still relish the chance to teach and to learn from others. Active participation in my local paralegal association is one way to do this. Networking with fellow virtual paralegals and California LDAs is another. Also, I think this is one of the reasons I enjoy preparing my newsletter so much. (Sign up at the right!) I love being the curator of a resource which I hope provides useful tips and resources to colleagues. And getting emails from readers sharing their own tips and resources is an even greater kick.

Wherever we work and whatever our roll, this is an inspiring message: always be learning, but also, always be teaching.

The Law School Controversy Be Damned, Congratulations to New Lawyers!

Some readers might be aware that there have been a lot of blog posts and tweets flying about the blawosphere and twitterverse recently about the wisdom of pursuing a law degree. The argument goes that law school is expensive, the resultant school loan debt is enormous, and there are no jobs! This topic has been batted about for some time now, but the most recent furor was instigated by last weekend’s New York Times piece called Is Law School a Losing Game?

Now, I’m not about to weigh in here on the relative pros and cons of a law school degree. I never wanted to go to law school myself, but I’m certainly glad that many did, or I would never have had a career in the field, and I wouldn't have such great attorney clients now.

No, I’m writing to celebrate those recent grads I know who did decide law school was for them, who passed the bar, and who now are eager to do something worthwhile with their careers.

Last night I attended the Sonoma County Bar Association’s New Admittees’ Reception. Present to be honored were about ten recent admittees to the California Bar. I managed to meet most of them. They attended a variety of (mostly) California law schools, and their ages varied, (in fact, one graduated from Stanford 34 years ago, and practiced for many years in other states), and some have landed jobs and others have not.

But as I mingled around and spoke with them, I was impressed and heartened by two things: First, each of the new lawyers I spoke with is proud of his or her achievement and excited about the law. And second, although there are regions of the state with bigger law firms, presumably higher salaries, and possibly greater job prospects, these folks choose to live and practice here, in slower-paced, somewhat rural Sonoma County.

As blogger and JD candidate Jack Wittington has pointed out, not every law school student is just in it for money, fame and fortune. Many choose this career because they believe they can help others doing it. The brand new lawyers I met last evening all certainly fit into that category, and my figurative hat is off to them!

So congratulations, I say, to new lawyers here in Sonoma County, in California, and everywhere!

After all, it's just an experiment!

People are going to peg me as a Peter Bregman groupie.  Oh well, there are worse things, I suppose.

Bregman wrote another post last month that has stuck with me ever since, called Live Life as an Experiment.  In it, he tells a story of an experiment in which he returned an item to a store and tried to get out of paying the 20% restocking fee.  His experiment succeeded; he appealed to the store manager’s generosity and avoided paying the fee, and learned that many people really do want to be generous, given the chance.  But he drew a much bigger lesson from this, which appeals to me a great deal.  And that was,

Live life as an experiment!

“Because when we live life as an experiment, we are far more willing to take risks, to acknowledge failure, to learn and develop. That's what experiments are all about: discovery and growth. There is no real failure in an experiment because it's all data. If something doesn't work, that's simply data that leads to changing behavior to see if something else does work.”

Bregman's argument suggests to me that I might be willing to do something I would normally find embarrassing, if it’s an experiment.  Take, for example, business cold calling!  Something I’m horrified at the thought of doing, for a number of reasons which are probably pretty sound.  But what if I made an experiment of it?  What if the point was to see whether a cold call resulted in a meeting, or in a hang-up?  If the goal of the experiment is simply data, then either result is OK, right?

What other business related icky projects could I turn into an experiment?  How would this mindset improve my willingness to take a risk?  What could I learn from it?

Who knows, it might even result in increased business!  Now, wouldn’t that be grand?