Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Book Review: <i>The First Myth of Legal Management Is That It Exists</i>

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
January 27, 2005

Triskaidekaphobics will try in vain to find a chapter in this book they're willing to skip: the 13 articles assembled here are all too relevant and important to miss. Most are also too funny to miss.

Written by our new Board of Editors member, Ed Wesemann, and published in 2004 ' with profits donated to the ALA ' this collection of skillfully crafted essays provides illuminating observations and pithy advice on a wide range of challenges facing law firms and lawyers. The book's first chapter, on profitability problems larger firms have with small clients, was the springboard for this month's roundtable discussion.

Directed primarily to firm managers and administrators, the book is rich with examples of the interplay between managerial decisions and the rational self-interest of individual associates and partners. I hate the term “must reading,” but the chapter on “When Good Law Firms Go Bad” is exactly that. Another chapter on social-economic dynamics examines why nonequity partnership is becoming a desirable option for some associates. Surprisingly, the same chapter goes on to explain how de-equitizing an underproductive partner inadvertently sabotages that partner's ability to regain productivity.

Several other chapters focus on topics of high interest to individual professionals. One offers irreverent suggestions to associates on how to build up their client lists (eg, make yourself indispensable to a successful mentor who has numerous clients and who smokes a lot); another offers “seven laws of successful networking.”

Paging back after an enjoyable read, I note my marginal check marks next to many other intriguing ideas, eg:

  • A faster and better substitute for mission-statement committee meetings.
  • How compensation formulas often confuse and misdirect partner-managers.
  • Why motivating partners with the promise of a larger share of profits often backfires.

To order the book from Author House, call 800-839-8640 or search for Wesemann at www.authorhouse.com/bookstore.

' Joe Danowsky, Editor-in-Chief

Triskaidekaphobics will try in vain to find a chapter in this book they're willing to skip: the 13 articles assembled here are all too relevant and important to miss. Most are also too funny to miss.

Written by our new Board of Editors member, Ed Wesemann, and published in 2004 ' with profits donated to the ALA ' this collection of skillfully crafted essays provides illuminating observations and pithy advice on a wide range of challenges facing law firms and lawyers. The book's first chapter, on profitability problems larger firms have with small clients, was the springboard for this month's roundtable discussion.

Directed primarily to firm managers and administrators, the book is rich with examples of the interplay between managerial decisions and the rational self-interest of individual associates and partners. I hate the term “must reading,” but the chapter on “When Good Law Firms Go Bad” is exactly that. Another chapter on social-economic dynamics examines why nonequity partnership is becoming a desirable option for some associates. Surprisingly, the same chapter goes on to explain how de-equitizing an underproductive partner inadvertently sabotages that partner's ability to regain productivity.

Several other chapters focus on topics of high interest to individual professionals. One offers irreverent suggestions to associates on how to build up their client lists (eg, make yourself indispensable to a successful mentor who has numerous clients and who smokes a lot); another offers “seven laws of successful networking.”

Paging back after an enjoyable read, I note my marginal check marks next to many other intriguing ideas, eg:

  • A faster and better substitute for mission-statement committee meetings.
  • How compensation formulas often confuse and misdirect partner-managers.
  • Why motivating partners with the promise of a larger share of profits often backfires.

To order the book from Author House, call 800-839-8640 or search for Wesemann at www.authorhouse.com/bookstore.

' Joe Danowsky, Editor-in-Chief

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers Image

In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.

Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.