Succession planning has become an increasing important subject for corporations.  In an interesting  study, Bruce Sherman of Integral Advisors, LLC, looked at the relationship of clear, active succession planning at publicly traded corporations to investor valuation of the company.  (See: "Investors Identify Their Top 7 Concerns Relative to Succession Planning" PDF Document 1/27/2010).  Clearly, those who are not paying attention to this are in for an increasingly rough ride both by regulators and investors.

Creating and implementing successful succession plans is not simple.  My informal review of many corporate law departments shows that while many have plans, few seem to succeed in having the person designated as the Deputy General Counsel (in most the second most senior lawyer and likely successor) actually step into the General Counsel chair as "planned".  Why is that?

That question is one we will explore in this next series of posts.

Once your homework is done, candidates identified and you are ready to interview, how should you construct that interview?  In part, that depends a little on the level of the position, but when a company is hiring a lawyer, it is important to remember the potential dollar impact of that choice.

Most corporations have learned the value of designing around  issues rather than spending later to clean up matters which could have been avoided.  Corporations have likewise understood that early involvement of lawyers in the creative process or in the sales process, can help avoid problems and last minute tense negotiations.  The dollar impact of having the right counsel on board can be huge, so designing an appropriate interview/selection process is critical.

Screening Interviews:

If you are not using a search firm or if you are having a difficult time narrowing down the field presented by the search consultant and if candidates are not local,  having a member of the interview team travel to meet with potential candidates is worth a thought.  Most candidates are actively working when they are approached about an alternative opportunity.  Particularly with lawyers, it is hard for them to be away from the office for a part of a day let alone a full day without provoking questions on their absence.  So, if the company wants to screen them before inviting them to more comprehensive interviews, take that into consideration, especially if it will involve significant travel for the candidate.

Poorly designed screening interviews which do not provide a balance between informing the candidate and evaluating the candidate, can create a real problem.  So if you are going to have a screening interview, make sure it is informative to the candidate as well as giving you enough information to select those who will go on to a next round.

If you are using a search firm, force that firm to narrow down the field.  That firm should screen out those who are clear misses, but should also make the tougher calls on which candidate is slightly better than another.  Get the search consultant's rationale, understand how they have screened and then, if you are comfortable with their rationale, don't plan for additional in-house screening interviews.

First Round Interviews:

Once you have narrowed the field through either your own or a search firm screen, when candidates are brought in for first round meetings, have them meet key people, those to whom they will report directly and those who can help them better understand the company.  Importantly, devote enough time to the interview process that it is meaningful for both you and the candidate.  If  it can be scheduled around a lunch, great.  It is always good to see a candidate in a slightly different setting than the office to gain a fuller picture of their communication and people skills.

While you may wish to see 3 or 4 candidates at this point, the goal of these meetings remains to both narrow your selection while also helping the candidate to better understand your company and needs.  At this stage, each person in the interview cycle should have around an hour with the candidate.  This allows for a wider range of questions, discussion and dialogue.  The back and forth is important. 

I've often found that the candidate's questions of me gives quite good insight into their thinking, interest level and motivation, so I like to start off with them asking questions about the material we've provided them.  But, that is more of a screening interview technique, so instead in a first round interview, I would focus questions on war stories which illustrate how someone problem solves, works in a team and understands the interaction between the law and business.  I would also describe candidly the work environment, hours, travel and how work flows.  Having three or four people on the interview team at this stage is good.

While interviews should be close together, I've seen some embarrassing situations arise if several candidates are brought in on the same day.  So, either make sure it is well coordinated or bring in candidates on different days.

Candidates have always reported favorably on having the person who started the interview process also end the interview day answering questions and wrapping things up.  This person should convey timetable for next contact and specify who will make that contact.  Typically this has been a representative from the human resources team, but not always.  Having a designated coordinator on the interview team is important to keep the process rolling and to give the candidate a point of contact.  Candidates also report favorably on receiving the business cards of the people they are interviewing.  This allows them to follow-up with a thank you note.

I'm often asked if panel interviews are appropriate.  I do not like them.  They tend to be dominated by one panel member and also tend not to give as much as they take.  However, whether in a panel or in individual interviews  it is important that a clear interview objective be provided for each member of the interview team.  This will avoid repetition of questions, allow for different perspectives and provide the candidate with a wider view of the company. 

If you want to meet with the candidate as a group, do it over a lunch following a group on individual meetings.  The less formal setting is good  for making this a session that provides both the company and the candidate with information.

At the end of this part of the interview process it is important to narrow the group to one or at most two candidates who will be invited back for a second round. 

Second Round Interviews:

Many ask how important a second round of interviews is to the process.  I think it is very important.  Multiple exposures to the candidate and vice versa, helps both make a good decision.  The cost of a poor hire is huge.  Investing in the interview process has a big payoff over the longer haul.

The second round should include the person to whom the individual will report directly, business people with whom the individual will work and other key executives.  These interviews should be confirming the first round interview team's  choice and provide more information on the position to the candidate.

If you are using a search firm, this second round of interviews should be followed quickly with the gathering of more detailed compensation information, a review of the reference check process and discussion of any other evaluation such as psychological evaluation, medical testing etc.

If you get to a financial handshake, it is time for detailed reference calls and a relocation visit with spouse.  While most companies understand that a detailed reference check should be done only with the permission of the candidate, some interview team members may take it upon themselves to make "soft" inquiries.  Some people are great at doing this, but be warned, I know in one case where this was done and it resulted in damaging the business of a lawyer who ultimately was not the finalist.  Clearly, that candidate in addition to being furious might have had a cause of action against the company.  So my recommendation, do it after there is a financial agreement and with the permission of the candidate.

Many companies do a poor job of presenting their offer to a candidate.  Across all of the clients I've worked with over the years, General Mills did it best.  They showed the value of their equity over time utilizing stated assumptions and detailed the value of their benefit program.  For lawyers coming out of firms, this is really critical, especially if they were at the partner level.

Often cash compensation for lawyers in private practice is comparatively high.  But the devil is in the details.  Many firms still pay on a draw system with profit distributions being made periodically.  Timing your offer and start date to follow a large payout could save you a lot of money.  Additionally, partners pay self-employment taxes, fund their own benefits and may have capital liability.  By spelling out each item in your offer, detailing the value of equity compensation, you may be much more competitive than you think.

General Mills spelled things out and then showed projections based on assumptions about individual performance and stock appreciation.  While there is some risk in that, there may be greater risk in not putting out an offer which attracts the best candidate.

So those are my thoughts on interviewing a lawyer.  Thanks for reading.  If you want to discuss any of this, send me a note and I would be happy to call.

The first two posts on this topic talked about theory and how to encapsulate experience into brief statements suitable to both convey data and lead an interview conversation.  This post will deal with the rest of the resume.

So you've completed the dot points under the Professional Experience heading, what's next?  Professional Employment.  This differs from the previous section because it describes the places where the experience was gained.  This section is  partially providing raw information but it is also providing "confirming data".  By that I mean readers of your resume will confirm their sense of the quality and sophistication of your work based in-part by whom you served, whom your employer was and the educational institutions you attended.

In the Professional Employment section you name the employer, provide a brief description and show your advancement.  Present this information starting with your most recent employer.  For instance it might read something like:

Early Cochran & Olson, LLC, Chicago, Illinois   Since 1989

 [Formerly Bert Early Associates]

A boutique executive search firm focused on recruiting lawyers into corporate settings both domestically and in selected international markets.  Past clients include, General Electric, General Mills, DeLaval (Part of the Tetra Laval family of companies), University of Illinois, Aon, Newell Rubbermaid, Entergy, The Duchossois Group, Sony BMG among others.

Principal/Owner Since 1994, Search Consultant, 1989 - 1994

That provides enough information so the reader can understand a little more about your prior employer.  By including clients, we've elevated this boutique firm from a small enterprise to an entity trusted by some pretty sophisticated companies.  Being mentioned in their company elevates the reader's impression of Early Cochran & Olson.  If you're providing this in a Word document attached to an e-mail, you can include links, like I've done, which folks can follow if they want more information. 

A description of a law firm might include the number of lawyers, its geographic footprint and, if appropriate, either a few client names or a general description of clients like "Fortune 500" or "middle market, emerging enterprises".  You then would show title, job progression.  Even if you are with a more recognized company, size, footprint etc. are important.  If you worked in a division, describe briefly that division.  For instance, that might read:

Beam Global Spirits & Wine, a multi-billion, international beverage alcohol business of Fortune Brands, with brands like Jim Beam, Courvoisier, El Tesoro and Knob Creek.

The most recent employer will get a little more space devoted to its description.  Earlier employers will get a little less space.  The point is, you want people who read this section to have a better understanding of where you worked and have that reflect positively on the evaluation of your experience.

Following the Professional Employment section, would be the Education section.  Here you list the institution from which you earned degrees, the year in which they were earned, indicating majors, honors and important activities.  Yep, even when you are well out into the professional world, educational data counts, so show honors earned.  The year the degree is awarded is important, because I need it to verify the degree.  Unless some non-degree educational experience is critical, I would not include it.  Also, if you started one place and finished another, show the initial institution under the one where you earned your degree, for instance:

University of Illinois, Champaign, BS Education, Honors, 1973 - 1976 (Indiana University, Bloomington, 1971 - 1972)

Semester/year abroad programs have become more important to indicate that you have gained some international exposure.  So I would include them, but put them under the main institution you attended.  In describing honors, pick the key ones you have earned.

The next section, Professional/Community Activities.  This can include publications, speaking engagements, professional associations and community activities in which you are actively involved.

Now for a bit more controversy; should you mention hobbies, family or other items in your resume?  Generally, unless invited, an interviewer will not go into things of a more personal nature.  However, if you want to gain a good insight into the culture of an organization you are thinking about  joining,  mentioning some of the important things in your life can lead to a discussion where you gain a lot of cultural insight.  If being a coach of a child's sport is important, include it. 

"What if the company doesn't encourage that type of thing, won't it disqualify me?"  It might.  But if you join that company and it does not allow you to do the things which are truly important to you, it may work out to be a very poor match, full of frustration and will not benefit you in the long run.  My advice, if the skill fit isn't perfect, you can probably learn and expand.  But if the people/cultural fit isn't right, keep looking.

So, I would include some mention of personal interests and family if they help you glean important information about the company culture.

There are a few things I wouldn't include in my resume, like a mention that references are available.  They better be!  If you wait until I ask for them you'll learn that I am really interested and not over use your references.  So keep your reference powder dry.  Same thing with compensation, wait to disclose until asked.  But when asked, you should be prepared to give both a summary and details.  If you think your compensation may be disqualifying because it's too high, you can always indicate that you are looking to be paid on par with other executives in the company at that level.  But, not disclosing compensation when asked is seen as lacking candor, an impression you don't want to create. 

Some folks recommend not including years on earlier employment or when degrees were earned in order to hide age.  But not including them  focuses attention on that omission and forces the interviewer to ask about it so they can verify the information.  It also makes you seem paranoid about your age.  Give the dates!

So, that's it.  Couple of pages, well organized, presents clear information, allows you to supplement in conversation and in additional e-mails, notes and the like.  No resume formula is perfect.  If your profession has different standards and expectations for what and how a resume should present information, go with it.  If you are less experienced, you may include more details on the technical aspects of your skills.

If you want to drop me a note, use the link to our website.  Mention this post and I will be happy to try to respond to any questions you may have.  It would be good to hear from you. 

Thanks for reading.  Next post, How to Interview a Lawyer.

In the first post on resume construction, I went into the concepts behind the recommendations I'm going to make here.  In a nutshell, the resume should both provide base-line information and facilitate an interview.  If your resume does both, it provides a real advantage.

If you think about most of the presentations you have made, you probably worked from an outline.  This helped organize your presentation, but importantly, allowed you to maintain eye contact with your audience.  The result, you connected better with the audience. 

Because the interviewer structures the conversation of an interview, providing them with an easy to follow outline of your experience, which allows good eye contact and connection, can be a real plus.  Here's how.

The top part of the resume should communicate contact information.  By using the whole width of the page to transmit that information, you can save valuable space.  For instance, you can have your name and cell number on the left side of the top and your address, e-mail and other phone numbers on the right.  Use a slightly larger, bold font for your name.  I've seen some resumes which put the name at the top and contact information in a footer.  It's awkward especially if I'm inputting the information into a database.

The next section of the resume can be titled something like "Professional Experience."  Here is my most radical suggestion; separate your experience from where you gained it.  Why, it avoids repeating similar things that you may have done for multiple employers and it allows you to bring forward experience from prior employment experiences which might get buried in a "ships log" approach to a resume.

Like a good outline, this section should be presented in a series of dot points.  For instance, if I have merger and acquisition experience, I might write it as:

• Mergers, Acquisitions and Divestitures ranging in size from $10 million to $1 billion including the $XX divestiture of a division of Sony, a $XX series of acquisitions for Fortune Brands, and the $XXX acquisition of a publicly traded company by General Mills.

OK, what this type of summary does is to identify a particular category of experience, give a sense of the range of that experience and then suggest a few examples of that experience.  In so doing, if the interviewer has a question on M&A experience, to what do you think at least some of the questions will relate?  "Tell me about the Sony deal?"  or "Tell me about the series of transactions you did for Fortune Brands".  The example you highlight will lead to questions and, if you have been cleaver, you will have selected examples which showcase your ability to solve problems, demonstrate domestic and international experience, show how you organize teams or participate in teams and will lead to follow-up questions.  It works!

A second dot point might relate to commercial contracting experience and could look something like:

• Extensive Commercial Contracting experience including distribution agreements, construction contracts, IT contracts, general supply and sales agreements ranging in size from $X to $XXX including deals with ABC, Best Buy, SAP, Trump and Tetra Laval.

Again, the dot point starts by highlighting a key category, describes the range of contracting experience, the dollars involved and who some of the parties were.  The idea is to seed the conversation, while also giving a subtle clue as to the sophistication of the work based on the size and the clients or counter parties involved.  The interviewer can look at the resume,  pick up the question quickly and return to eye contact with you then ask fairly specific questions to begin the dialogue.  Importantly, the interviewer (or a data input clerk at a search firm) doesn't need to search through a block of narrative to figure out what you've been doing, it's easy, M&A and Commercial Contracting.

Alright you get the point of this.  By the way, this method also allows you to highlight  examples which while they happened earlier in your career may still be relevant in describing how you work, problem solve, participate in a team, think critically etc.  In a form where your experience is linked to when and where it was gained, a key example of your work might get buried.

How do I select the dot points?  Good question!  Most of the work I do is with lawyers, so I suggest they pick 5 or 6 substantive areas as main headers for their dot points.  If  I'm looking at someone who wants to be considered as a candidate for a General Counsel job, I will likely be looking for M&A experience, Commercial Contracting, Litigation Management, International scope, Corporate Governance, SEC experience, and, depending upon particular industries, Regulatory matters and or Intellectual Property experience.

Another important dot point for this section will relate to your management of people and budgets.  I'm looking both for participation in and leadership of teams and an ability to think through and live with a budget.  It could read something like:

• Led and Participated in teams evaluating strategic acquisitions.   Managed a law department of XX with an annual budget of $XX.  Reported to the CEO and served as Secretary to the Board of Directors.

That dot point has a lot of information in it.  It invites questions on your management style, how the budget had changed, what you learned from your Board exposure and how the CEO and you related.  In so doing, you cover a key area and invite a series of conversations.

Another dot point could discuss an area that was "out of the box" where you demonstrated your ability to learn quickly,  exercise key judgment and produce a good result.

These dot points will take up most of the top half of the first page of your resume.  You can see from this format how they both convey information and also facilitate conversation.  Mark Twain once said something along the line of  "Sorry this letter is so long, I didn't have time to write a short one."  Writing these dot points is really critical and not that simple.  They need to convey substance while also inviting conversation.  But, they don't need to tell your whole story.

That is important.  There are lots of ways to supplement the information in your resume.  These other channels include your cover letter, transaction lists, follow-up notes, all of which can expand on the information you provided in outline form in your resume.  Most importantly, you can supplement the information outlined in your resume during an interactive conversation with your interviewer and gauge their interest in the depth to which you should go on a particular topic.

Remember, an interviewer for an executive position is not only interested in the technical depth of your experience, they also want to understand how you think, problem solve, interact with people, participate in a team, lead and how you might be able to contribute to the advancement of their company.  Much of that is transmitted in the selection of your experiential dot points, the examples you salt into them and how you talk about them during the interview.

The Professional Experience section is not the "career objective" or experience puff piece I see in lots of resumes.  I think those are a waste of space.  Instead, these dot points outline your experience giving some detail hints but allowing for a fuller picture to be painted during your interview.

OK, what's next?  I'll cover the rest of the resume construction in my next blog, coming soon!!  Thanks for reading.