Biglaw, Small Law Firms

Beyond Biglaw: Care To Chat?

Columnist Gaston Kroub discusses the strengths of chat as a communication medium for lawyers.

By  
on

Every so often, it makes sense to review just how we find ourselves communicating — especially in a business such as law, which is all about communication. It does not matter if you are at a large firm or a smaller one — much of your day will be spent either preparing for, or actually engaging in, communication with others. Depending on the stage of your career, who you are communicating with can differ. For example, younger lawyers typically have less contact with clients, and most of their communications are therefore with colleagues, whether they be partners or fellow associates at their firms. Likewise, how you are communicating can change as your career progresses. Again, associates may find themselves spending more time preparing long-form memos or draft documents, in contrast to more senior lawyers who spend more time on outward-facing emails with clients and opposing counsel.

We all know that email is the form of communication used most by lawyers. The reliance on email is not limited to law, of course, and in the past I have given my thoughts on how to maximize one’s effectiveness in using that communication medium. But there is another form of communication that seems to be gaining ground, both for lawyers and even more so within the broader public. That communication form is chat, whether it be through a proprietary intra-firm platform, Google Hangouts, iMessages, or third-party apps like WhatsApp. As with most technological advances, the adoption by many lawyers of this communication medium has actually lagged its acceptance by the world-at-large. Because lawyers are so good at finding the problems and risks with everything, that phenomenon is not a surprising one.

But before the lawyerly impulse to bury chat as a communication tool for lawyers takes root, we should also discuss some of chat’s benefits. I am an advocate for the use of chat, within reason of course. Considering the ubiquity of chat, it also behooves lawyers to at least consider its power and limitations, if only because our clients are using it, in both their personal and professional lives. Perhaps certain kinds of clients are more likely to use chat to communicate, but I also know that for the younger generation, chat has replaced text messaging as “the way” to communicate. For example, my sixth-grader has a number of WhatsApp group chats going on his phone. One of them is for the ENTIRE sixth-grade, or at least everyone with a phone. Which today is everyone, and even though those same phones can send emails as well, it seems that chat use far trumps email use by my son and his friends. Of course, I doubt he worries about managing a crowded inbox. Yet for me, one big benefit of using chat is that it keeps the email inbox that much less crowded, and therefore helps keep me productive, rather than wasting valuable time “cleaning out” emails of limited value.

My own use of chat has changed over the years. As an associate, I worked at a firm that had an internal chat application. I got use out of it, even as most of the older lawyers did not know it existed, much less how to use it. For example, it was an easy way to instantly (and intrusively, but in a gentler way than through an unsolicited phone call) communicate with fellow attorneys in other offices — or just down the hall, if the need arose. In fact, we often used chat to share thoughts while taking conference calls from our offices. Using chat to share thoughts was (and remains, for that matter) a much more effective way of helping out whoever was speaking on the call than the alternative of passing notes, sending emails, or mouthing commentary. An added bonus was that the chat feature used by the firm listed everyone that was signed into their office computers, so it was a good way of keeping tabs on where people were. Every little bit of information helps when you are an associate in a hard-charging and competitive environment.

While I used chat while in Biglaw, mostly for internal communications as discussed above, it has become an even more important part of my work day now that I am at a smaller firm. At our firm, we use Google Hangouts (and on occasion Skype) to communicate with each other multiple times a day. It is a great way to get “quick takes” from each other, communicate while on conference calls, and share links to articles or information of interest. We even video chat often, especially when we are not all in the office together. Doing so helps maintain the personal touch that is so important for a small firm. We even use chat to interact with certain clients, but most often with those clients who are used to chat because it is already a big part of their industry. For example, many of our clients who are in the investment industry (especially those who trade) use chat to communicate with other traders and analysts — usually through their Bloomberg terminals. So for those clients, communicating with us by chat, especially during the trading day, is preferable to phone calls or lengthier emails. Another general advantage is that chat functionality is inherently mobile, and easily accessed from phones and tablets. In short, a chat conversation is typically easier to maintain over time and distance than an email chain.

So chat is an important part of my practice nowadays, but there are also limitations that I am mindful of. For example, “substantive” communications with clients are still best done by email or memorandum. Additionally, it is important not to let the “ease” and relaxed nature of chat influence the professional nature of communications with clients, or even colleagues. As with email, the better approach is to not write anything you would not want read aloud in a courtroom. We have also noticed that it is easy for chats — especially when an important issue is being discussed, or when there is a difference of opinion — to go “off the rails” and become unwieldy. Our way of dealing with the problem is to use a “safe word,” which when invoked is a warning to immediately cut the chat and get on our conference line. That approach works for us, and reflects our experience and understanding of the limitations of chat as a communications tool.

No matter what size firm you are at, the point of using chat is to enhance, rather than hamper, productivity. Every lawyer will find different drawbacks and benefits to incorporating chat into their practice. What is clear, however, is that “everyone else is doing it” which means that sophisticated lawyers need to understand how best to utilize this powerful way to communicate — even if the extent of your interaction with chat is to decline the invitation to join the family WhatsApp picture-sharing and gossip-mongering group. More likely, though, chat is a part of your life already — and if the trajectory continues, it will become more of a part of our professional lives with each passing year.

Sponsored

Please send any comments or questions to me at gkroub@kskiplaw.com or via Twitter: @gkroub. Any topic suggestions or thoughts are most welcome. For those interested in the intersection of intellectual property litigation and investing, I have also started a new blog/newsletter/video series, “The Markman Note,” which is being hosted at Mimesis Law. Feel free to check it out and let me know of any thoughts or suggestions.

Earlier: Beyond Biglaw: 4 Tips For Writing Good Emails

Gaston Kroub lives in Brooklyn and is a founding partner of Kroub, Silbersher & Kolmykov PLLC, an intellectual property litigation boutique. The firm’s practice focuses on intellectual property litigation and related counseling, with a strong focus on patent matters. You can reach him at gkroub@kskiplaw.com or follow him on Twitter: @gkroub.

Sponsored

Topics

, , , , , , , , ,