Where do you stand on GC BS barometer?
Michelle Golden posted on what I call the GC BS barometer. She actually called her post "GC Sense That Building Relationships' Is A Euphemism For 'Give Us More Work.'" From Michelle's post:
Little wonder that in law, for example, increasing numbers of General Counsel sense that when your firm talks about "building relationships" it becomes nothing more than a euphemism for "give us more work," while "providing added value" becomes interpreted to mean, "at higher rates!"
Let me begin with this premise. One does not become the General Counsel of a business without being smart. Book smart, sure. But more so, street smart. Savvy. Good at reading people. Knowing the smell of BS when the aroma is disguised with sweet perfume.
With that premise, one has to wonder whether lawyers preaching "added value" and "partnering" and "relationship building" are ready to acknowledge that these tools are used because they provide--at least they should provide--reciprocal benefits. These are tools that law firms can use to build stronger relationships, which, over time, provide enormous benefits to the firm. Those benefits should be known and acknowledged. But the words themselves provide no inherent value to the client. That, too, needs to be acknowledged. In order to avoid triggering the BS barometer, it is essential that clients be shown exactly what benefits they receive from the promise of a "better relationship."
There are, to be sure, great benefits that law firms can provide as part of an effort to build stronger relationships with clients. The key to avoiding the problem identified in Michelle's post is to be specific and view the offering from the GC's perspective first and foremost. Because if you can't get past the BS barometer, there will be no benefits for the firm.
By the way, this exquisitely honed barometer is precisely why, in my view at least, there should be nothing remotely resembling selling that takes place during a client satisfaction survey.