Magical Thinking Building Blocks

There are five common components to magical thinking:

1)      Reality Disconnects: Leadership may “get it,” that is, comprehend the economic shifts and realities that drive today’s “New Normal” in the legal profession, but a lot of rank and file partners believe that the old days will return so that it will be sufficient to keep doing what they have always done.

2)      Mind Reading: Firm leaders often assume that rank-and-file partners can and will divine the will and reasoning of the Executive Committee and will make the effort to keep abreast of firm economics, strategic decisions and operational guidance. Neither leaders nor followers are well-served by making untested assumptions about the other’s motives and priorities. In fact, however, many individual partners just don’t seem much interested in their firm’s overall well-being – it’s just a place to “do their thing.” Several firms have told us that they have stopped making comprehensive firm financial performance data available to all partners because no one was bothering to read it.

3)      Cloudy Communication:  Just because followers don’t crave clear and explicit communication does not mean that leadership should be exempt from providing it. All too often strategic and tactical decisions and policies are communicated in vague generalities and without clear and convincing authority. Goals are expressed in sweeping overgeneralizations, and performance standards and consequences are subjective, unclear or non-existent. Once-a-year strategic updates and policy summaries at the firm retreat are not enough either to spread the news or build broad scale buy-in.

4)      No Consequences: If changed priorities are not accompanied by clear performance standards and clear consequences for substandard compliance, partners have no incentive to alter their behavior or their personal priorities.

5)      Responsibility and Authority Muddles: Change initiatives bog down and suffer from “friction loss” where there is: a) a lack of role clarity that defines which lawyers bear particular task responsibilities, and b) fuzzy, “gentlemanly” or inconsistent lines of authority.  This results either in org charts that do not adequately reflect real pathways of power or individuals who cavalierly ignore the org chart and go their own way.

In our next post we will have a deeper look at the practical implications of Magical Thinking and some suggestions for escaping Magical Thinking mind traps.