Tipping the Scales

Mark Fleming: “Disagreeing Without Being a Jerk Is the Hallmark of a Really Good Advocate”

Published by tippingthescales on December 5, 2013 | 2 Responses

Mark Fleming is a partner in Wilmer Hale’s Litigation/Controversy Department, and a member of the Appellate and Supreme Court Litigation Practice Group. His practice focuses on appellate litigation and other complex litigation matters. Mark has argued cases before the Supreme Court of the United States, the US Courts of Appeals for the First, Third, Eighth, Ninth, District of Columbia, and Federal Circuits and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and Appeals Court. Mark’s prior experience includes clerkships with the Honorable David H. Souter of the Supreme Court of the United States, the Honorable Michael Boudin of the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, and the Honorable John C. Major of the Supreme Court of Canada. Mark also served as an associate legal officer in the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. A member of the BBA’s Amicus Committee since 2007, he became Chair starting in 2013. He also served as Co-Chair of the International Law Section from 2007-2009.

1. You will soon be arguing your third case before the Supreme Court, which very few attorneys have the opportunity to do. Can you explain a little bit about the case, and how you have mentally prepared for it? What have you learned with each new appearance in front of the Court?

It’s an immigration case involving the family-based visa system. Imagine that your brother is a U.S. citizen and you’re a foreign citizen – your brother can petition for you to come into the country. If the petition is granted, you can bring your spouse and any children younger than 21 with you as derivatives, but often since lines to get visas are so long, children under 21 may turn 21 while you’re waiting and then can’t come in as derivatives. When you get a green card you can petition for your adult children to come to the country. But at that point, under the prior law, the clock was reset to zero, so to speak. The child effectively lost her ‘place’ in line for the visa and had to restart the process, which can take years. So you face a difficult choice – do you come into country and leave your kids behind, or do you just give up on coming at all?

Congress tried to fix this in 2002 with the Child Status Protection Act, which provided that children who “age out” can keep their place in line as adults – basically that they get credit for the time they have already waited. But agencies have been construing the law in a narrow way so it will not apply to people who are coming in as derivatives on petitions filed by U.S. citizens. The Fifth Circuit in Texas held that these agencies were acting contrary to statute, and by a 6-5 vote, so did the Ninth Circuit in California; the Second Circuit in New York said that it was fine. Our clients are the winners in the California case; the Obama administration asked the Supreme Court to take the case. In addition to filing our clients’ brief on the merits, we also worked with counsel for some “friends of the court” who filed amicus briefs supporting us. A brief by former and current Senators who were in the Senate (many on the Judiciary Committee) when the law was passed said that their intention in crafting the law was aligned with our position. It was signed by three Democratic senators and three Republican – including some really well-known figures, like Senator John McCain and Senator Dianne Feinstein – and for them to come together to speak with one voice is very telling. While I think we are right on the merits, I expect the oral argument to be challenging; the Administration is represented by the Office of the Solicitor General, which always comes to the Court with real credibility.

My preparation, as with any case, is to practice as much as I can. I try to figure out what points I want to do my best to get out in that half hour before the Court. This includes having moot courts, where I ask people who are not familiar with the case to read the briefs and ask hard questions. The team that has been working with me for months critiques my answers. And then I stand in my office and talk out the case to myself. Overall, I try to get used to what it’s like, either being barraged by questions or having uninterrupted time to speak – it’s rare in front of that bench, but sometimes it does happen.

Honestly, I don’t think I’m any less nervous now than I was the first time. My first Supreme Court argument was a patent case, and our opponents were the U.S. government and Stanford University, both of which had very capable advocates. I was a rookie doing it for the first time. It’s not as though you ever stop worrying about getting a question that trips you up – the fear is always there. The only thing I can do is to try to know a case inside and out, so that I can talk to Justices in a conversational manner and given them the information that’s helpful to them in deciding a case, hopefully in our favor.

2. During your clerkship with Justice Souter, what did you learn from him about leadership? How did this inform the way you approach your work?

On my first day on the job, I arrived at the Court’s entrance – the guards didn’t know who I was, and I had no badge since I was just starting work as law clerk. One guard asked, “Who are you working for?” I answered, “Justice Souter.” He said, “Ah, he’s the best of the nine.” I always remembered that, and I understood why as I continued, because Justice Souter was somebody who would take the time to talk to everybody he encountered. He was polite, gentlemanly, and genuinely interested in every conversation – he remembered people’s names and details of their lives. That struck me as a thing he was able to do better than others, and because of it, he would always have people willing to stretch and help him. Even though people might disagree with him, they would never dislike him. I can never be as good at it as he is, but that taught me the importance of doing your best to be nice, even though the nature of the profession can be confrontational. Our job is to clash and disagree – doing it without being a jerk is the hallmark is a really good advocate. People who inspire the best work in their teams do it by being respectful and understanding.

In another instance, when I was thinking of what I wanted to do after my clerkship ended, I asked Justice Souter if he could give any advice about what I should be considering. He suggested that we get lunch in his office and talk. We did, and I was amazed not only about the amount of time he took, but also the perspective he offered. I was seriously considering living in Washington and joining a firm that practices in front of the Supreme Court often, and he told me, “You should think hard about whether you want to live in Washington.” One of the lessons he was keen to impart was that you do a lot better if you’re from somewhere else. Not only did he take the time to give me this advice, he explained why he felt this way, and his reasons were quite compelling in many ways. It was an easy sell for me to choose Boston over Washington, but it was good to be reminded that place matters. I was very lucky that I was able to work at WilmerHale, where I could live in Boston, but work on cases—like the Child Status Protection Act case—that have a solid Washington component.

3. Knowing that amicus briefs are going to be representative of the entire BBA, what are the dos and don’ts for leading a group with diverse backgrounds to support one ideology?

The most important thing is to get a clear position formulated as concretely as possible early on. If you can do that, then you can go to relevant Sections for input, and then present the position to the Executive Committee and Council. The issues for which we produce amicus briefs are usually ones where the legal profession has a pretty clear interest one way or the other, and it’s usually cases where the BBA has taken a position before, or it’s clear what position it might want to take. We’ve had some situations where the Council couldn’t come to an agreement, so in the end, the proposal was dropped and nothing was done – and that’s fine. What’s most difficult is when everyone thinks a brief should be filed, but no one has thought of what it should actually say. As a Committee, we have instituted procedures about how a proposal is brought, and to make sure there’s an understanding of what position the BBA is to take. It is the Committee’s job to flesh that out, identify counsel as possible authors, and make sure there’s enough time to make outline or draft, so that it’s a proposal that the Council and Executive Committee can evaluate fully.

4. Is there any other advice or experience about leadership that you would want to share?

There is one thing that I think we’re in danger of losing in the profession: because people work so hard and are so tethered to their devices, it’s harder and harder to get out and just talk to people. You don’t have to go back that far to find senior lawyers who say that, in days past, you used to go over to a club or bar association and talk about issues of relevance to profession. This is not the case as much as it used to be, and it’s something we need to be careful not to lose. Whenever you are sitting talking to intelligent people who share an interest in law, far more often than not, you end up learning something of value to you in your practice. That type of interaction is not something our generation makes time for as much anymore, but we really should.

Lisa Goodheart: “Relationships Are at the Heart of What We Do in the Profession”

Published by tippingthescales on November 26, 2013 | Leave a response

A partner at Sugarman, Rogers, Barshak & Cohen, Lisa Goodheart concentrates in environmental, real estate and general business litigation. She has extensive experience in cost recovery cases, permitting appeals, land use disputes, enforcement actions, insurance coverage disputes, design and construction matters, and a broad range of business litigation matters. Also an active supporter of the arts community, Lisa has served as a director and officer of several nonprofit corporations operating modern and jazz dance companies. Lisa has served as President, President-Elect, Vice-President, and Treasurer of the BBA, and has been a member of the Executive Committee, Council, and Environmental Law Section, for which she also served as co-chair. She is also President-Elect of the Boston Bar Foundation, as well as a member of its Executive Committee, Grants Committee, Board of Trustees, and Society of Fellows.

What did you learn over the course of your Presidency at the BBA? What was the biggest difference from where you started to where you ended?

I think one of the things that the BBA presidency provides for anyone in the position is an amazing perspective on the whole breadth of what goes on in the Greater Boston legal community. I got to see how much range there is in the scope of what lawyers do, both in terms of their substantive practices and in terms of civic engagement and public service activities in the community. In particular, I learned a lot about the many different ways in which lawyers contribute to their communities and our government, and I think about that now in a more expansive way than I had before.

One hugely educational opportunity for me was the opportunity that every BBA President has to work with leaders of the judiciary on various issues. Those included concerns about ensuring adequate funding for judiciary, the development of pro bono initiatives, and a whole range of access to justice concerns and administration of justice proposals that are very important to the system. The judiciary properly counts on having the engagement and support of the legal community for those things.

As Chair of the Judicial Nominating Commission (and in other leadership roles as well), how did you filter the directives or mandates handed down to you and communicate them with other members of the group?

At the JNC, I did not view my responsibility as one of filtering and communicating mandates; it was much more a matter of trying to be faithful to what I understood and believed Governor Patrick to be looking for in terms of the qualities of judicial candidates. What I tried most to do as Chair was to help set a tone and create an opening for a discussion that would produce good results. The goal is to present the Governor with a slate of recommended candidates for every judicial position who have the best quality of mind, personal demeanor and character, integrity, and work ethic, and who can give the Commonwealth what it deserves. So I was mostly focused on trying to create an environment that would allow the necessary questions to be asked and answered, which meant – for all of us on the Commission – showing respect for the different experiences of different people, listening with an open mind to others’ points of view, and, when necessary, finding ways to disagree without being disagreeable.

All of the members of the Commission were very conscious of trying to honor the values that we heard Governor Patrick articulate. At every swearing-in for every new judge, he talks about what he considers to be the qualities of a good judge, and they include being humane as well as smart, wise, and hard-working; being patient and respectful to people who come before the court feeling frightened, confused, and under great stress about whatever their problem might be; and working to make sure that everyone who comes before the court leaves with the feeling that they have been listened to and heard, and will be treated fairly. These were things that we all took to heart and worked together to try to bring about, and I know that the current JNC Chair, Macey Russell, continues to be focused on those things.

What advice or wisdom do you know now that you wish you had known or someone had told you when you were just starting your career?

I haven’t really had one particular “a-ha!” moment where I felt like I finally unlocked the secret! But when I look back on my early experiences when I was just starting out, I did get something very important, which was encouragement from more senior lawyers whom I respected. That was so very important to me when I was starting my career, so it is something that I hope I will remember to do for others now that I’m further along, because it is even more daunting now to begin a legal career than it was when I started. I think people may get discouraged from time to time, and having a more senior person provide support and offer confidence is extremely valuable.

Relationships are so important in this profession – in many ways they are at the heart of what we do. Sometimes the kinds of professional relationships that young lawyers need will develop organically, and sometimes it takes bit more effort to get them to develop. There are a lot of different ways for making that happen, ranging from just working closely with people to more structured formal mentoring programs to social relationships of various kinds. The most important thing is to connect yourself, one way or another, with those who are going to be supportive when you need support, and for whom you can do the same.

How has your leadership in the legal community, both at your firm and at the BBA, translated to and helped in other areas, such as your leadership within the arts community?

In a sense, any leadership opportunity you have in one context will help you be a better leader in other settings. But the connections are not always very direct or obvious. I got involved in the arts community because I was a dancer and I loved that world, and at a certain point in time it became clear that my legal skills could be helpful, in terms of helping the small dance companies I was involved with to become incorporated, gain tax-exempt status, develop a management structure and run in a more businesslike fashion – all of which does not necessarily come naturally to people in the dance world! I found myself getting involved because I loved particular groups of dancers and I wanted to support them and they asked me, and not at all because I was looking for a possible leadership opportunity. My law partner Alan Geismer is also a long-time dance lover and he has done the same for other groups, and probably for many of the same reasons. It is a great feeling to contribute to something that moves you.

Mary Bonauto: “When You Seek Respect for Your Own Common Humanity, That Means Respecting the Humanity of Others”

Published by tippingthescales on November 18, 2013 | Leave a response

Mary L. Bonauto is the Civil Rights Project Director at Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD). Since 1990, she has litigated in the state and federal courts of New England on discrimination issues, parental rights, free speech and religious liberty, and relationship recognition. She and two Vermont co-counsel won a 1999 ruling that same-sex couples are entitled to all marital benefits and protections in Baker v. State of Vermont, which led to the nation’s first civil union law. She was lead counsel in Goodridge v. Dep’t of Public Health, the first high court ruling striking a marriage prohibition for same-sex couples; co-counsel in Kerrigan v. Dep’t of Public Health, in which the Connecticut Supreme Court also ruled for marriage; advocated in state legislatures for marriage; and served on the Executive Committee of the 2009 and 2012 Maine ballot campaigns. Mary led GLAD’s federal court challenges to DOMA in Gill and Pedersen, leading to the first District Court and Court of Appeals victories against DOMA, and then coordinated amici briefs for the Windsor case at the Supreme Court.

1. As a leader, how do you help to push and encourage others to join the types of groundbreaking decisions that would lead to victories like Goodridge – especially among concerns about the feasibility of such an undertaking?

GLAD’s work is premised on clear constitutional values, belief in the worth and dignity of all people, and optimism in change over time. Our cases tend to focus on what is “fair,” which includes both pro-equality components that level the playing field for all as well as anti-subjugation components that acknowledge the persistence and depth of prejudice. We have confidence that with the right case (or bill) at the right time, people will stand up for our shared constitutional values around equal citizenship, avoiding double standards, and concern for the welfare of all people. Of course, optimism without work won’t get you far. We look at every angle, including every argument that can be leveled against us, and think about how to respond and, where possible, how to find common ground, even before we move forward. Arguments without soul won’t get very far either, which is why the plaintiffs in our cases and real people in legislative initiatives are so central. It is them and their stories that convince others that there is a legal (often moral) dilemma that must be resolved – despite their individual discomfort – by resort to our national values of equal treatment and justice for all.

2. How can a leader most effectively deal with his or her opponents, both professionally and personally?

Institutionally, GLAD strives to stay on the high road, and that culture has been helpful for all of us. Even though there have plenty of times when our opponents demonized and maligned us, we consciously avoided doing the same self-defeating thing to them. After all, when you seek respect for your own common humanity, that means respecting the humanity of others. I suppose that is a version of the golden rule. Keeping focused on the LGBT people we serve, and our collective hopes for a brighter and freer future, helps with perspective too.

Overall, we have all tried to keep our eyes on the prize, tell the truth, work with integrity, eviscerate the arguments against us, and treat people with respect, because it is the best we can do. That is not to say that I have never been boiling mad or very hurt or terribly saddened, because of course I have.

3. What was your experience working with the Boston Bar Association in the fight for marriage equality?

The BBA was a key partner both before and after the Goodridge ruling. First, the BBA worked through its committees, ultimately forging a consensus to urge the Council to support marriage. After full throttled debate, the Council agreed and the BBA then submitted a terrific amicus brief to the SJC addressing the protections and responsibilities conferred by marriage, drafted by Bingham McCutchen. Perhaps it was with the BBA’s brief in mind that Chief Justice Marshall commented, “The benefits accessible only by way of a marriage license are enormous, touching nearly every aspect of life and death.”

After the Goodridge ruling, the BBA was there to remind the public that the ruling was grounded in principles of liberty and equality dear to all of us. There were several lawsuits to thwart the ruling and constitutional amendment proceedings to undo it. In December 2003, the State Senate crafted a civil union bill which “preserved” marriage by barring access for same-sex couples and allowed state-level protections. It then asked the SJC for an advisory opinion as to whether such a bill met the mandate of Goodridge. BBA President Renee Landers spoke inspiringly at a press conference and, standing with the plaintiffs in Goodridge, joined an amicus brief arguing that “creating a separate status for a group of people when there is no legitimate reason for doing so is inherently unequal, and therefore unconstitutional.” Four of the Justices opined that “maintaining a second-class citizen status for same-sex couples by excluding them from the institution of civil marriage is the constitutional infirmity at issue.” Bonnie Sashin at the BBA was always in touch about how the BBA could help, and the BBA spoke out at critical junctures to urge defeat of constitutional amendment proposals to undo Goodridge or substitute civil unions for marriage. Many individual BBA leaders and members were great advocates with their own legislators and with other attorneys. Quite deservedly, the BBA was there to celebrate the outpouring of joy that accompanied the first marriages on May 17, 2004.

The BBA’s commitment has not slackened. It has joined amici briefs in several cases challenging the federal Defense of Marriage Act, including at the U.S. Supreme Court, and the portion requiring discrimination against gay people’s marriages has now been declared unconstitutional. The BBA has also stepped up for justice in other marriage equality cases around the nation.

4. From where the nation and legal system is at this point, what are the next steps, and what leadership is necessary to continue on in the fight for marriage equality?

To succeed, any justice struggle must engage all three branches of government and the court of public opinion. Ten years after Goodridge, we are at a point when each is fully engaged. We have now won marriage in the courts (starting with Massachusetts), in state legislatures (whether Massachusetts legislators rebuffing a constitutional amendment to reverse Goodridge in 2005 and 2007 or Vermont’s dramatic override of a Governor’s veto in 2009), and at the ballot (starting with Maine voters changing their minds and voting for marriage in 2012 after having voted against it in 2009, along with Maryland and Washington).

Chief executives can be tremendous leaders, and Governor Patrick led the way among Governors. His leadership made a tremendous difference in defeating the final attempt to amend the constitution here in 2007, along with the leadership of then Senate President Terese Murray and then House Speaker Sal DiMasi. It is only since then that marriage has been secure in the Commonwealth. Nationally, 14% of Americans have changed their minds to support marriage equality from 2003 to 2013. President Obama’s description of his journey from opposing marriage to supporting it is exactly the kind of transformation happening for many Americans, both about marriage and about LGBT people more generally.

None of these accomplishments would have been possible in a vacuum. No minority can succeed without the support of allies, and allies have been crucial at every stage in the struggle here. There were early movers like the Boston Bar Association and Massachusetts Bar Association, a spectrum of civil rights groups, and children’s advocates, who joined briefs in support of the Goodridge plaintiffs. Now our allies in this struggle include many major faith groups who support the dignity and equality of gay people and same sex couples, as well as labor and business (the three largest labor organizations and 278 employers filed separate briefs in the Supreme Court DOMA litigation), and many other important voices.

Since the Supreme Court’s rulings in Windsor (striking down DOMA Section 3) and Hollingsworth (finding there was no jurisdiction to review a 9^th Circuit ruling striking down California’s Prop 8), there has been tremendous activity. State legislatures in Illinois and Hawaii approved of marriage within days of each other in November, just as there was a burst of activity in the spring with Delaware, Rhode Island, and Minnesota passing marriage laws. New Jersey’s Supreme Court cleared the way for marriage by refusing to stay a lower court’s ruling that the “civil union” nomenclature thwarted access to federal marital protections now available post-Windsor, demonstrating that marriage was necessary to provide equality. There are nearly 40 lawsuits pending around the nation, most in federal court, in purple and red states, and people are engaged on the issues. My hope is that over the next few years, the Supreme Court will ultimately settle the issue as the final arbiter in our federal system.

Susan Alexander: “There Is Nothing That Makes You More Successful Than Passion”

Published by tippingthescales on November 13, 2013 | Leave a response

Susan Alexander is Executive Vice President, Chief Legal Officer and Corporate Secretary of Biogen Idec, Inc. Prior to that, she had served as the Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary of PAREXEL International Corp., as the General Counsel of IONA Technologies, and as Counsel at Cabot Corp. Prior to that, she was a partner at the law firms of Hinckley, Allen & Snyder and Fine & Ambrogne. At the BBA, Susan is a member of the Council and the Chair of the Beacon Award Selection Committee.

1. As Chair of the Beacon Award Selection Committee, you guided the group in choosing an award honoree. How can a leader do this most effectively, knowing what is in the balance?

In situations like this, it starts with the committee. We were very fortunate to have a great mix of talented and committed people – some who were thinking about this process for first time and some who had been on the committee before. The BBA staff also did a really nice job of helping us to leverage the experience of prior committees. We spent time initially getting grounded in what we thought made for a good recipient, and we quickly determined that impact – particularly a sustained impact – was a major factor in who we would select; that really helped us to focus our thoughts.

In the end, my job as the Chair was to step back, be an honest broker, and let the conversation happen in a way that assured all opinions were put in the mix and the strength of the committee members could come through. People really took on the responsibility to think about all of the nominees and did a terrific job of recognizing that some were great examples but did not fit the exact criteria that we had determined.

Paul Lee rose to the forefront quite naturally. I was particularly impressed by the number of people who said, “He doesn’t know me, but…” and went on to tell a special story of how he impacted them personally. The Committee members were quite thoughtful about the fact that this was the first time an individual was selected, but it was clear that the broad and sustained impact he has had over several decades more than qualified him to be the first individual recipient.

2. You have served as an in-house counsel for much of your career. What has each new experience gradually taught you about leadership? How has it developed your leadership style?

Every career is a serpentine path of one sort or another. I had no idea when I started out that I would end up doing the work I’m doing now. One of the great things about being in-house is having had the chance to do so many different things. I’ve been able to use the great skills I learned in law school in multiple ways. Stepping out of the firm and into the business side takes on a whole different dimension. For me to practice law in such a holistic way, where I’m part of the business team but also bring my own particular set of skills, is very satisfying. It allows me, and the legal organization, to guide and direct our clients’ thinking proactively.

At Biogen, we’re working on important things that make a big difference to people’s lives, and my team and I find that gratifying and motivating. You’re always doing that in some form or fashion as a lawyer, and I think that is what drives us all.

My goal as a person and leader has always been to learn and share as much as I can and to seek out engaging roles that leave me enhanced in some way. If you love what you do, that comes across. Your energy and enthusiasm makes people want to follow you. If you really commit, and can help others see the possibilities you see, they will naturally want to work hard alongside you.

3. What advice would you give to an attorney hoping to be selected to lead or be part of a BBA Committee – such as the Council or the Beacon Award Selection Committee – that might seem unusual or unexpected?

The first thing I’d say is to make sure people know you want to do these kinds of things. There is nothing that makes you more successful than passion and putting yourself out there. The other thing, which may be more unexpected, is that you may look at a group and think, “Those aren’t people like me – they have different experience and fit a certain profile that I don’t” – but that difference may be exactly what makes you and your perspective the most interesting and valuable. The BBA, like most forward-thinking organizations, is looking to be inclusive, and it understands that bringing people with varied backgrounds and perspectives to the BBA results in the best thinking. If you think, “My practice doesn’t fit into the Council,” for example – mine doesn’t either! In-house counsel like myself and several other Council members are practicing in a different environment but are important members of the bar. Young lawyers, diverse lawyers, in-house counsel, those with a particular specialty – that kind of mix can be very interesting and important.

4. Is there anything else you would like to add?

It’s important to realize that everybody is a leader: no matter what your role, you have the opportunity to contribute a leader’s perspective. The more we take that into account, the more we make the legal community and the world a better place.

Tipping the Scales: What to Watch and Read That Will Change Your View on Leadership Styles

Published by tippingthescales on November 7, 2013 | Leave a response

This week, Tipping the Scales is taking a breather from its regularly scheduled programming – we have some big dates coming up in November at the BBA, and some equally big names will be lending their voices and advice to the blog. Besides – what with the weather changing and some long, chilly evenings ahead – we thought it was time for us to offer up some fireside material for your perusal. If you constantly strive to build on your leadership skills and expand your mind, or even if you just need a mid-afternoon break, Tipping the Scales has a couple of great options to help you while away a few minutes – and be productive as you do so.

What We’ve Been Watching:

Constructive Conflict: Tipping the Scales has a well-documented appreciation for TED Talks, which provide a myriad of perspectives delivered by great thinkers from a wide array of fields; their lessons are often broadly relevant to many areas, including the legal community. This talk by Margaret Heffernan opens by recounting the work of Alice Stewart, a female doctor in the 1950s who discovered that X-rays performed in utero increased the rates of cancer mortality in children. In the wake of their publication, her critical findings were reinforced by a statistician who sought primarily to disagree with her, and because he could find no viable argument against her research, they were all but confirmed as fact. The more universal point lauds “thinking partners who aren’t echo chambers,” and Heffernan goes on to extol the merits of these critical relationships and how they can be fostered in a healthy way.

What We’ve Been Reading:

Introversion Vs. Extroversion: A long-time topic of interest, the dialogue surrounding these two styles of recharging mental energy – which, as it happens, have nothing to do with how shy or outgoing a person is – came to the forefront recently around the Web. Fast Company, a magazine and online resource targeted toward innovative thought leaders, produced two articles on the subject that debunk a lot of common misconceptions and tie in the explanation with leadership expertly. The science behind it is fascinating!

Now we invite you to sound off. Have you read, watched, or otherwise found any really thought-provoking or unusual leadership pieces? Let us know in the comments.

Anthony Fitzpatrick: “People Want to Feel That They’re Part of a Team”

Published by tippingthescales on October 31, 2013 | Leave a response

Anthony J. Fitzpatrick is a partner at Duane Morris LLP, and practices in the area of intellectual property litigation, with a concentration on patent and trade secret matters. He serves as co-chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property Litigation Practice. Tony has extensive experience as lead trial counsel in federal and state courts and before arbitral tribunals. Although he has handled cases involving a wide variety of complex technologies, Tony has gained particular experience in pharmaceuticals, biologics, medical devices and other life sciences. Tony has been named a 2013 “IP Star” by Managing Intellectual Property magazine, and he has been named on several occasions to Irish America magazine’s Irish Legal 100. Tony has been a member of the Boston Bar Association’s Amicus Committee since 2004, and has also served on the Boston Bar Journal’s Board of Editors and as Co-Chair of the New Lawyers Section.

What does it take to run an IP litigation practice? to lead a trial team as lead trial counsel?

In patent litigation, you frequently have larger teams than in other kinds of litigation, and there can be a lot of moving parts to those kinds of cases, especially when you get to trial. You can have a lot of issues to deal with and a lot of people to lead – lawyers, the support team, witnesses, etc. It can also be quite stressful if you are in the heat of trial. From a leadership point of view, it’s really important to make sure that every team member has what he or she needs, and is motivated in whatever way is appropriate to do his or her job. It’s also crucial to lead calmly. People can get nervous and out of their comfort zone, whether that person is a lawyer or witness. As a leader, you want to make sure that people are focused and able to do the job.

There’s a related skill set needed when leading a practice group – again, it’s about motivating and empowering people to do their job, while making sure people have what they need. It’s important to try to build an esprit de corps. People want to feel that they’re part of a team; getting people connected and working toward a greater purpose, whatever it might be, is very important. In a large law firm, you can have people on a team working in different offices who don’t see each other on a regular basis, so connections are key. Our firm holds an annual all-attorney meeting where we not only get together for business meetings, but also for social activities so that people can get to know each other and their respective capabilities. Building that sense of community, and also integrating new people – whether lateral partners or new associates – is important to help to grow the group. When I started at Duane Morris, we had about 12 lawyers on the IP team; now we have more than 80. A lot of what I’ve done as a leader has been devoting time to recruiting new people and integrating them into our group.

How did your time on the BBJ’s Board of Editors and as Co-Chair of the New Lawyers Section relate or contribute to your continued growth as a leader?

All of the experiences I’ve had at the BBA have had one thing in common, namely that I’ve been able to work with extremely talented, bright, prominent lawyers, in a very collaborative atmosphere. I served on the Journal’s Board of Editors at a time when Maria Recalde as Chair was working to reinvent the Journal. She did a great job, and the Board was comprised of smart, committed lawyers. I have great memories of the meetings and the thoughtful give-and-take discussions about particular articles and issues.

Similarly, being on the Amicus Committee has been just as rewarding because, like the Board of Editors, it’s a group of really smart, committed lawyers. We’ve handled some sensitive issues, like whether we ought to recommend that the Association file a brief, what the brief should say or argue, and in some cases having to recommend that we not file a brief. The process of handling these issues has always been very open and collaborative – and this atmosphere has produced great results.

As Co-Chair of the New Lawyers Section, I tried to create an open playing field, because it’s all about empowering people to get the work done. Collaboration and respect are key. That’s very much the way Duane Morris also operates, from the top down, as a firm culture. In many ways, that is how I have developed my own leadership approach. It’s consistent with what I’ve seen from within successful leaders both within my firm and at the BBA.

Working on the BBA’s Amicus Committee surely involves making some tough calls. How do you work with others and ensure the proper course of action?

It’s a matter of putting the time in to study the issues – whatever that may be – and to understand them; then you’ve got be willing to state your opinion. We’ve certainly had discussions where not everyone has seen eye-to-eye, but I can’t recall an instance where we ultimately, after discussion, didn’t reach some kind of consensus. There have been some issues that have been quite sensitive, and we’ve ultimately not made a recommendation but instead laid out the issues and referred it to Executive Committee and Council to make the final decision, but I can’t ever recall a formal vote or divided majority and minority opinions. We’ve been able to achieve consensus by talking things through, being thoughtful, and making sure that everybody was listening to everybody else’s opinion – and the committee has worked really well in that regard.

First Justice Jeffrey Winik: “Above All, a Leader Should Never Lose Sight of the Core Issue at Hand”

Published by tippingthescales on October 23, 2013 | Leave a response

The Honorable Jeffrey M. Winik has served as Boston Housing Court Judge since 1995 and has held the position of First Justice since 2004. Amid concern for unrepresented litigants to have meaningful access to justice, he has dedicated himself to advancing the Housing Court Lawyer for the Day Program. Judge Winik chairs the Housing Court’s Education and Time Standards Committees. He sits on the Boston Homelessness Prevention Center Steering Committee and the Boston Tenancy Preservation Program Advisory Board. He is a member of the Boston Bar Association’s Real Estate Pro Bono Committee. He is an Adjunct Professor at Boston University’s School of Law.

1. How do you define leadership in the legal profession? What could be done to encourage it?

Leadership in the legal profession melds vision, character, creativity, and enthusiasm to inspire lawyers (and non-lawyers) to work cooperatively towards a common purpose. The key to effective leadership involves more than the ability to formulate a goal and apply practical management skills to a given task; it involves encouraging others to be creative, innovative, and to work together collaboratively. An effective leader is more interested in reaching the shared goal than in receiving credit for it, and must be willing to mentor others and encourage them to assume responsibility and eventually leadership roles.

A leader has to be passionate about each project. That passion can enable a leader to maintain focus during periods of slow organization, inactivity, or general indifference from other parties. If the drive is there, people will eventually catch up. However, passion must be tempered with maturity and wisdom so that it does not overwhelm people, but rather helps bring people into the project. Everyone comes to the table with different personalities and talents; good leaders must recognize their own strengths and weaknesses. Leadership can be learned; there is, however, no substitute for experience.

There is a significant pool of talented leaders (and future leaders) in Boston’s legal community. Being a small legal community, most of its members know one another, or know of one another, and can readily identify those with innate leadership talent. The Boston legal community through the Boston Bar Association has demonstrated a willingness and ability to organize with efficiency and effectiveness around a broad range of important issues –from expanding legal services for our neediest citizens to protecting judicial independence. Boston is the home of a vibrant academic community; there are always fresh ideas percolating.

The Boston Bar Association is uniquely positioned to marshal its members to address important issues under the direction of a core of leaders. It can get the proverbial boots on the ground. One important leadership skill is developing new leaders. The BBA has provided opportunities for its members to rise through its ranks to positions of authority and responsibility. To do this successfully with an ongoing project requires focus on the immediate, but the ability to have a vision of what may emerge over the horizon. The BBA was instrumental in creating and maintaining the Lawyer for the Day programs, and I have watched as a generation of new leaders has emerged from the BBA to manage and expand these programs. The programs have continued to thrive with each leadership change.

2. What advice do you have for new lawyers fresh out of law school and searching for scarce work?

The past three or four years have been challenging for new lawyers. I teach at Boston University School of Law, and every year I tell my students that while it will take time and patience to land their first job; land it they will, and once they have that first job, everything else will fall into place. From that point on, their professional development and career opportunities will flow from their performance as lawyers. Part of landing that first job involves being in the right place at the right time. Because of that, I encourage law students and young lawyers to participate in bar-related programs like Lawyer for the Day. It gives them the opportunity to gain experience by working with clients on interesting cases, and the opportunity to interact with experienced lawyers who appear in that court regularly. The experienced lawyers, especially those from smaller firms and government agencies, may want to hire young associates on relatively short notice, as they often don’t know their hiring needs far in advance. These kinds of interactions can lead to that first job.

There is an added benefit to volunteer participation: I know that many judges are very supportive of new lawyers who volunteer to provide legal assistance in their courtrooms. For example, in a manner consistent with their obligation to be fair and impartial, these judges will take the time to explain procedural rules and common practices, sharpen the new lawyer’s legal analysis, explain evidentiary rulings, and suggest how to lay proper foundations and how to formulate proper questions. If young lawyers are willing to volunteer their time in court, the judges will try to make the experience valuable and rewarding.

I believe that networking is an important part of a new lawyer’s job search. In addition, I recommend that a new lawyer follow up meetings or encounters with a personalized handwritten note, not an e-mail. Lawyers and prospective employers remember the personal touch. And above all, rather than sitting at home, I suggest that a new lawyer get involved in law-related projects. It enhances the prospect of meeting the people who can assist in the lawyer in securing that first job.

Another thing to keep in mind is that sometimes a law firm will offer temporary or fixed-period employment involving a specific case. Young lawyers should consider taking these jobs to get a foot in the door. For new lawyers seeking that first permanent job, there is no law-related job that they should reject because they consider the work to be menial or limited. Be flexible and take advantage of every opportunity to be involved in the practice of law.

3. What does it take to be a leader in a setting that often involves tense, emotional situations with a lot at stake?

Good leaders need to understand the issue at hand and the reasons why the case is creating tension and emotional upheaval. An effective leader must avoid personalizing the dispute and stay focused on the possibilities for resolution. That leader should try to de-escalate tension by giving all participants a chance to be heard and encouraging the parties to listen to each other. Leaders recognize when dealing with emotional situations that, despite their best efforts, flare-ups will occur. In these settings, a good leader will anticipate a possible provocation, and try to redirect the parties before the provocation becomes a conflagration.

Above all, a leader should never lose sight of the core issue at hand. A good leader will have a sense of where there may be overlap in the parties’ positions and will always try to focus the parties to bring that area of common ground into play. That is often the best basis for resolving or de-escalating a tense situation. The role of a leader in this type of setting is not dissimilar to the role of a mediator: a successful resolution in mediation comes about when the parties themselves recognize that compromise can address enough of their concerns to allow for a shared victory. In a tense setting, a leader needs to focus the parties on the positive aspects of each side’s position rather than demeaning those parts that may have less merit. People who hold positions very passionately sometimes cannot understand or tolerate any disagreement with their views; those who do disagree are seen as the enemy. A good leader must deflect that destructive impulse and refocus the creative instincts of the parties to enable them to fashion a solution to the problem. Leadership in tense emotional setting is about imagining solutions, creating the right kind of atmosphere to make the solutions possible, deflecting personal animosity and empowering the parties to embrace the possibility of resolving the dispute on shared terms based upon compromise.

4. How does choosing to engage in pro bono/public service work exhibit leadership as a lawyer?

Pro bono work is a collaborative effort involving lawyers, bar associations, communities, and the courts. Participants share a vision, a passion, and a sense of commitment to address the perceived need, as well as a willingness to take responsibility for matters small and large. In a broad sense, a young lawyer who chooses to become involved in a pro bono program is someone who recognizes instinctively that collaborative civic engagement is an important part of our professional responsibility. In other words, the initial decision to get involved in pro bono work is a manifestation of leadership in its crystalline form. Once involved, young lawyers will then have the opportunity to refine their innate leadership skills by working with more experienced lawyers who share their same sense of professional responsibility. The potential for leadership exists within each of us, but becoming a leader is a process that takes hard work and commitment over time.

Sheila Hubbard: “We All Have a Responsibility to Do Something to Help Others”

Published by tippingthescales on October 17, 2013 | Leave a response

Sheila Hubbard is Executive Director of the Volunteer Lawyers Project (VLP) of the Boston Bar Association, and provides free civil legal assistance to low-income residents of Greater Boston, primarily through the pro bono services of private attorneys. Dedicating her career to public service, she has worked as a Homeless Specialist for the Department of Social Services, Director of Boston’s Minority and Women Business Enterprise Office, the Chair of the Massachusetts Parole Board and President of the Association of Paroling Authorities International. She was the Associate Director of the Office of Public Interest Advising at Harvard Law School, assisting law students and alumni to pursue public interest and legal service careers, and Senior Program Director for the Equal Justice Initiative in Montgomery, Alabama working on issues of race and poverty. Sheila is a member of the BBA’s Council, and of the BBA’s Delivery of Legal Services Section.

1. This is a time of tough budgeting and scarce resources. How do you exercise your leadership authority to navigate these difficulties and serve Boston’s vulnerable populations?

The first thing that came to mind was staying optimistic while being realistic. VLP is 95% federally funded and is significantly affected by what goes on in Washington. Over the last three years, VLP has seen its federal grant from the Legal Services Corporation reduced by $500,000 due to federal budget cuts. As a leader, it’s important for me to be open and honest with staff about where the organization is financially, but also to let the staff know that, despite these tough fiscal times, I have a vision and a plan. I realized early on that part of the plan had to include a diversification of VLP’s revenue sources so that we were not so dependent upon federal funding, especially by increasing the number and amount of individual donations VLP receives from its supporters.

I also encourage staff to be creative and think outside the box about ways to do more with less. However, it is very important to recognize that there is a point at which you can’t do more with less – you have to look at the critical services of your organization and reduce where needed so that you’re not overburdening the staff. The VLP’s reduction in federal funding has been absorbed primarily through staff attrition and expense reduction. However, this year and toward the end of last, we have had to reduce services to some of the client populations we were serving. We have also been fortunate to have supportive and experienced volunteers who have provided additional training and mentoring to our less experienced volunteers, which has been a great help to staff. These measures, however, will only take us so far in continuing to weather more federal funding cuts that are on the horizon.

2. You have held leadership positions in a variety of sectors; how have these experiences informed your approach as Executive Director of the VLP? What have they taught you about being an effective leader?

I’ve learned so much about leadership over the last almost 30 years in each of the arenas where I’ve worked. Process is often everything. You could have this great idea, but if you implement it in the wrong way, your good idea may never get off ground. Some important pieces of going through the process are bringing the impacted parties to the table at the beginning, ensuring that people are able to participate in the process in a meaningful way and making room for people to inform the decisions that will be made. In the process, you must also be clear about what decisions will be made by the group and which you, as the leader, will make, with an understanding that not all interests can be accommodated.

Two other important lessons I learned were that a leader has to be a good manager and that being a good manager is a skill set. Just because you know a lot about a substantive area does not mean that you’ll be a good manager of people. You have to acquire the skill of managing people and then develop it. Another important component of being an effective leader is a recognition that staff is your most valuable asset. You need to commit your personal time and a portion of the organization’s resources into demonstrating that principle. I have an open door policy and assure staff of confidentiality: what they share with me stays with me, and if I need to respond to or act on what they’ve said, I protect my source. As a leader you need to get to know your staff, their strengths and areas they can improve, so that you can effectively manage how work is allocated and where professional development is needed. An organization is like the body: every part has a role to play. If we’re all doing what we’re supposed to be doing, then the whole thing will work well. I also show my appreciation to staff by not only what I say, but also what I do. An effective leader demonstrates that every person and level in an organization is important – while there is a hierarchy in function, there is not a hierarchy in value.

As a leader, you have to be okay with being out front by yourself. Sometimes people are looking for someone to take them from where they are to where they and the organization need to be with compassionate guidance. I try to create an environment where mistakes aren’t fatal and people are able to learn from their mistakes.

The final lesson I’ll share – that keeps me sane – is the recognition that I can’t fix everything. I will be able to address some issues and others will be left for the next person to solve. Leadership is like a relay race: I am handed the baton from the person before me, and then I run as fast and hard as I can while I have the baton; when I leave, I’ll pass the baton on to the next person. You must prioritize and do the best you can with the time you have. As a person that likes to solve every problem she encounters, it has taught me how to practice the Serenity Prayer.

3. What are unique challenges that come with working in legal services and an organization that provides entirely pro bono assistance? What are the rewards?

The paramount challenge in legal services is that there are far more clients than resources can accommodate. That’s really tough, because we know how great the need is. But you do what you can to meet as much of the need as you can, and you make sure to do that to the best of your ability. A challenge of being an organization that provides legal services primarily through pro bono assistance is that we really feel the impact of the market on the legal profession. Over last few years, we have seen a significant increase in unemployed and transitioning attorneys and we have had to look at ways to effectively utilize and support that population. Another challenge is meeting the needs and utilizing a wide variety of volunteers, from high school students through the BBA’s Summer Jobs program to retired lawyers and everyone in between. We work to meet the needs of each type of population in terms of the types of mentoring and training we offer, the way cases are referred, and the types of volunteer opportunities that are available. We therefore provide cases that range from the quite simple to the very complex, and volunteer opportunities that can be only a few hours a week to lawyers who handle cases from beginning to end.

On the rewards side, just being in the access to justice arena, working to make good on our constitutional mandate of establishing justice, is quite gratifying. It is also gratifying to see the significant impact we are making in the lives of our clients by addressing legal matters in their jobs, their families and their finances, and to provide this service free of charge to them. We also have the benefit of being able to provide the avenue through which our volunteers are able to experience this gratification in the services they provide to clients.

A challenge and a reward of being in pro bono is that we are dependent on the goodwill of others. However, VLP sees that outpouring of goodwill everyday by the people who volunteer. VLP’s last Annual Report theme was “Pay it Forward.” We all have a responsibility to do something to help others.

4. How does choosing to participate in pro bono/public service work exhibit leadership as a lawyer?

I think a leader is a person who has to have a certain level of maturity. A sign of maturity is taking care of needs beyond your own. If you think about a child, their whole world is about ‘me’ and they’re focused on themselves. As you grow, your focus should shift to those needs outside yourself; what can you do with what you have been given to benefit someone beyond you and yours. So for me, the act of volunteering in public service is a level of maturity that shows leadership, because you’re focusing on the world beyond you.

5. Is there anything else you would like to add about leadership?

I am very passionate about diversity in the legal profession and legal services, especially increasing diversity in leadership and senior management positions. It’s something that I strive to do in whatever organization I’m in. The first thing I see when I come into a place is its composition– is there a variety there? Diversity is an important value because it is only through the inclusion of different perspectives that you can improve the quality of your work and relationships. Improving the diversity of an organization encourages and challenges everyone to learn from others and make room for differences. We have worked very hard on this at VLP and as a result have a very diverse staff and board. The head of the organization must take a leadership role for the goal of increasing diversity to be realized. At VLP, for example, the few times we have been able to hire during my tenure, I have insisted that before interviewing begins that we have a diverse applicant pool. In one instance I extended the application deadline when the applicant pool was not diverse enough in order to seek out more diverse applicants. As a leader, that’s where the rubber meets the road: how far will you go and how much will you do to achieve what is important?

Susan Finegan: “Now, More than Ever, We Can Make A Difference Through Pro Bono Work”

Published by tippingthescales on October 10, 2013 | Leave a response

Susan Finegan is a Litigation Partner at Mintz Levin. She currently serves as Chair of the Pro Bono Committee and Chair of the Hiring Committee, and as the firm’s full-time Pro Bono Partner. Susan is a member of the BBA Council; she previously served as Co-Chair of the BBA’s Delivery of Legal Services Section and was a member of the BBA’s Task Force on Expanding the Civil Right to Counsel. Susan is Chair of the Supreme Judicial Court’s Standing Committee on Pro Bono Legal Services and is a member of the Access to Justice Commission and Commission on Judicial Conduct, as well as a former member of the Judicial Nominating Commission.

1. How have you been shaping and developing the role of Pro Bono Partner as the first full-time Pro Bono Partner in Mintz Levin’s history? What legacy do you aim to leave?

The firm created the role of Pro Bono Partner in 2007 upon my return to the firm after three years as Legal Director of the Victim Rights Law Center. At the time, the firm believed that it could benefit from devoting the resources of a partner to manage the more than 400 ongoing pro bono matters in our eight offices. While the firm had always focused on giving back to the community since its founding in 1933, pro bono management started with the adoption of a pro bono policy and a pro bono committee in the late 1980s. Hiring a partner-level attorney dedicated full-time to this important firm effort was a natural extension of that legacy.

My initial focus was getting up to speed on the clients and staffing, and to providing more organizational oversight. After that, the pro bono committee and I were able to look more strategically at what pro bono work the firm was doing and analyze the participation and focus of each section and office of the firm. While a significant percentage of our pro bono work continues to be focused on domestic violence and sexual assault, we are always looking for new ways to address the legal needs of the communities we serve. We also started working with some of our in-house counsel on joint pro bono projects. Another positive aspect of my job at this time was to start working closely with the other pro bono professionals in the city; our pro bono community is a very welcoming and collaborative one.

Over the last several years, in addition to these firm roles, I’ve been fortunate to work outside the firm on statewide pro bono efforts through my work on the Access to Justice Commission and, later, as chair of the Supreme Judicial Court’s Standing Committee on Pro Bono Legal Services. From those perspectives, I’ve worked with others to make a statewide impact by encouraging more attorneys to do pro bono work, particularly those who haven’t traditionally participated, such as in-house counsel and retired lawyers. To be able to leverage the resources of a place like Mintz to assist with these more global efforts has been extremely useful.

In terms of legacy, the statewide efforts have been very energizing – new programs have been developed, such as the Access to Justice Fellows Program that I’ve helped develop with other colleagues; rule changes have been adopted; and new pro bono recognition programs for attorneys have been created. Hopefully the legacy of these statewide efforts will be to encourage more attorneys to engage in pro bono work, and ultimately to help more people in need. From a firm standpoint, I could point to a number of clients I’ve assisted, or different initiatives that I’m proud of, but the most impactful legacy would be to have nurtured a generation of Mintz Levin attorneys who continue to do pro bono work throughout their careers because they started practicing at a firm where that was not only encouraged and supported, but expected.

2. What lessons have you learned from your extensive experience working with the judiciary and judicial committees? How has it informed your leadership style?

Being involved in the Access to Justice Commission and SJC’s Pro Bono Committee has reinforced what an important role the judiciary can play in ensuring that low- and moderate-income people in the Commonwealth can access the justice system. There are so many self-represented litigants in the courts today – up to 80 or 90 percent in some courts – and there is a lack of funding for civil legal services and for the courts. With that in mind, it’s incredibly important to have members of the judiciary, as well as other bar leaders, focus on these important issues. I’ve seen firsthand how having a judge dedicated at least part-time to such issues at both the Trial Court – Advisor for Access to Justice Initiatives First Justice Dina Fein – and at the appellate level – Co-Chair of the Access to Justice Commission Justice Ralph Gants – can have a significant and positive impact.

As for other committees, such as the Commission on Judicial Conduct and the Judicial Nominating Commission, it has been an honor to work with other dedicated volunteers on behalf of the judiciary. These appointments have allowed me to think about the role of the judiciary and the impact a judge can have on litigants that come before him or her, both negative and positive. From my perspective, leadership in the judiciary is primarily about temperament and respect – how to be a strong leader in a courtroom while at the same time exhibiting patience for those who may not understand what is going on. That has helped my own practice in representing pro bono clients, many of whom do not understand the court system, and most of whom have never experienced having someone actually listen to them and explain what is going to happen.

3. What are some challenges of working on pro bono cases? How do you train attorneys to handle cases, i.e. sensitive pro bono cases, that are outside their practice area?

Most of our pro bono referral agencies provide training on substantive legal issues, and many provide mentoring as well. In addition, attorneys at the firm have developed expertise on many areas of pro bono practice, so there is often an internal mentor for attorneys who need one. And, on each pro bono case we undertake, there is a partner assigned to the matter. That being said, the most difficult challenges tend to arise from the non-legal aspects of working with low income clients. These run the gamut from understanding cultural differences, overcoming language barriers, or recognizing signs of trauma or mental illness. And often attorneys will develop a close bond with their clients, and won’t know how to establish appropriate boundaries when clients call at all hours of the day and night for non-legal advice or with questions that are outside the scope of the representation. Last, it’s important to let attorneys know that they may not have all the answers, but that they need to know what questions to ask, and to whom, so they can best advise their client. Some of these aspects of practice just take time to develop, so is it important to know that you have resources throughout the legal community – within your firm, at another firm, or at a legal services organization – to ask questions in a safe environment.

4. How does choosing to engage in pro bono and legal services work exhibit leadership as a lawyer?

We are fortunate to practice law in Massachusetts, which has a rich tradition of pro bono legal service. With civil legal services funding decreasing precipitously, and with courts flooded with self-represented litigants, now, more than ever, we can make a difference through this important work. As lawyers, we have special skills that can, for example, save a person from homelessness, help a client gain access to benefits to make ends meet, assist a nonprofit with legal needs so it can continue to provide critical services, or save someone’s life by helping them obtain asylum. Engaging in pro bono work demonstrates leadership because, in doing so, we as lawyers are giving back to members of our community who desperately need our help.

Manisha Bhatt: “Leadership to Me Is the Ultimate Vote of Confidence”

Published by tippingthescales on October 3, 2013 | Leave a response

Each year Governor Deval Patrick issues a proclamation naming October Pro Bono Month, which the BBA wholeheartedly embraces. This month, the profiles on Tipping the Scales will focus on attorneys who have devoted their energy and resources to making a difference in pro bono and legal services work.

Manisha Bhatt is a senior staff attorney at Greater Boston Legal Services (GBLS), working in the Family Unit where she represents survivors of domestic violence in divorce, paternity, and abuse prevention proceedings. She became the president of the South Asian Bar Association (SABA) in 2012 after being named Board Member and Member of the Year in 2007. Manisha was awarded with the North American South Asian Bar Association’s Cornerstone Award in 2009 and the BBA’s John G. Brooks Legal Services Award in 2011. An alum of the Boston Bar Association’s Public Interest Leadership Program (2005 to 2006), Manisha was also on the Boston Bar Journal’s Board of Editors from 2007-2013, a member of the Civil Rights & Civil Liberties Section from 2008-2013, and former co-chair of the Pro Bono Committee of the BBA’s Litigation Section (2011-2013). Manisha is a member of the BBA’s Statewide Task Force to Expand Civil Legal Aid in Massachusetts.

1. What leadership skills have you used and learned so far as president of SABA?

I feel that the number one thing that I’ve had to hone in on as a leader of a bar association is humility. I’ve had to anchor into that place of balance between being a person of principals and many ideas about the direction of an organization while at the same time recognizing that I do not lead in a vacuum — that there are other perspectives and ideas that must be incorporated. Leadership to me is the ultimate vote of confidence, it is a sacred trust. This is especially true for bar association leadership, because you are entrusted with financial responsibility, keeping up the mission and ideals of organization, and being the voice of the organization.

I have learned that the most important task one has as the leader of a bar association is to ensure that there is a solid foundation for the future that lies ahead. When you lead from a place of humility, that is what inspires respect and consensus because you acknowledge that your way isn’t the only way. While you may be the ultimate authority, soliciting and respecting the input of others you build a stable foundation for the organization because you are building the next generation of leadership. I’m proud to say I have the pleasure of working with a very cohesive and supportive Board of Directors with various experiences, and through that, SABA has been able to grow at a steady pace with a stable foundation.

In my opinion, the best leaders are the people who have the capacity to think outside the box, and are courageous. They will say “this hasn’t been done before, but let’s embrace that and let’s do it anyway.” When you have good intention behind your fearlessness and boldness, you’re met with great results because you are trying to accomplish something worthwhile.

One of SABA’s newer initiatives has been a collaboration between our organization and South Asian medical professionals: last year, we had an interdisciplinary panel about the ACA that was very successful. This year, we’re going to reach out and collaborate with another South Asian organization for a similar event. As we were planning the event, we considered whether it would be a benefit to our members; if so, then that was going to inspire them to join the organization and be part of the mission of the community. The collaboration provided various benefits to our members, including a perspective on how other professions think, which helps us to do our best jobs our attorneys.

2. What challenges did you face while developing the ‘Know Your Rights’ (KYR) project, and how did you overcome them to succeed?

Sometimes one of the challenges was my own thinking: “it’s going to be a lot of work!” But I have learned that when you believe in something so much, you find a way: avenues open, and you realize that it will happen. I spent a lot of time thinking about how best to implement this program. I wanted to present to my board a program that I was 100% sure was going to be a success because it would be something that would benefit many people AND be sustainable for the future. Other challenges that frequently occur are concern over enough resources or concern about how to simply get the project going. Honestly, working with little to no budget is just my training as a leader, but I overcome that by simply believing wholeheartedly in what I do. Who can argue with the intention to empower the community about their fundamental legal rights?

While I was developing the KYR project, I consulted with respected community leaders who are doing great work in access to justice, bouncing the idea off of them and asking what else we could do to make this a fantastic program. Being receptive to feedback is instrumental. For instance, I also solicited feedback from the class participants as well because I wanted the project to be collaborative with those we were trying to benefit. We did have constructive feedback during the first run of the program about a topic that somebody wished was included, so we added a class to cover the various court systems in Massachusetts.

3. What advice do you have for a prospective leader looking to find his or her voice and find the confidence to assert it?

To me, finding your voice is about having a strong conviction and wanting to bring that to the table. It doesn’t have to be a loud voice. Just speak. When you’re voicing something sincere, people will align with you and what you’re trying to accomplish. Yet- leadership and finding the appropriate forum takes time. I spent a year and a half mulling over my KYR initiative because I wanted to take the time to develop relationships in order for it to be sustainable, and I’m proud that it has been a success.

Sometimes I see young lawyers who come in and want to do everything right away. While I respect that ambition and zeal, I’ve always been a proponent of ‘slow and steady wins the race.’ Learn about the organization and gradually work your way up because that will teach you very important aspects of the organization you wish to lead. True, we need dynamos, but genuine leadership needs seasoning, time, dedication, and hard work.

4. How does choosing to engage in pro bono and legal services work exhibit leadership as a lawyer?

The very fact that there is an attempt to solve the problem of providing pro bono assistance to the vast number of underprivileged is taking a leadership initiative. Active participation and inspiring others to be led by your example is the embodiment of leadership. I do believe people want to do good and right, but perhaps they’re daunted by the prospect of how large the problem is or how much time it will take. At the same time, there is something magical about helping somebody and using our knowledge as attorneys to change somebody’s life – it is very powerful! Spending 20 minutes helping somebody fill out a form will potentially affect lives in ways you perhaps can’t even quantify. It’s amazing how many people in our society are daunted by navigating the legal system. If you have just 20 minutes to help someone do it right, you’ve just changed their life forever. Is that not leadership?

1 2 … 4 Next →