Balancing work and personal life in the small law firm.

Too often, the term "law office management" refers only to business development, or computers, or other aspects of a firm's infrastructure. What about the people? Without talented, satisfied, engaged professionals, there is no law practice to manage.

Quality of life issues have never been more important to the legal profession than they are today. It seems as if bar journals and bar association meetings are heavy with topics like part-time work and dissatisfaction among attorneys. Yet, almost always, the focus is on large firms, where the sheer number of lawyers appears to make flexibility much easier than in small practices.

How can flexibility work in a small practice? How can small firms help their lawyers balance the often conflicting demands of work and personal life? The good news is that, although they lack the number of professionals that lets big-firm lawyers tag-team on cases, most small firms possess a far more useful quality: a genuine collegiality that big firms simply cannot attain. This collegiality is critical to the success of any flexible work arrangement, which thrives on trust and fails in its absence.

In addition, most small-firm practitioners chose the small practice setting precisely because it allows them a degree of freedom of choice--a range of movement--not available in big firms, with their policy manuals and regimented procedures. That range of movement can easily be expanded to include part-time and other flexible work arrangements if everyone is willing to pull together.

Sure, there are difficulties. It might be easier if everyone wanted to work a standard (for the legal profession) workweek under standard conditions. But many women and men (not only those with working spouses) are questioning the value of 80-hour workweeks.

A 1990 American Bar Association survey found lawyers rank "time for self/family" as the second most important factor determining their overall feelings about their work (first is intellectual challenge).(1) Lawyers' feeling that they are living lives out of balance is serious cause for concern. Nineteen percent of lawyers responding to the ABA survey are not satisfied with their work. Between one-half and three-quarters of attorneys say that they are chronically anxious and experience mental and physical strain and that their jobs are pressure-filled.

The costs are considerable. One-third of practicing attorneys suffer from depression,(2) making lawyers between 5 and 10 times more likely than other professionals to suffer from a major depressive disorder.(3) Lawyers are twice as likely as other professionals to commit suicide.(4) Fifteen percent of lawyers suffer from alcoholism,(5) compared with 10 percent of people in the nation as a whole.

With so much evidence that something is wrong, it should come as no surprise that lawyers are looking for alternatives. And while most of those lawyers are women-unwilling to follow the generation of women lawyers before them in forgoing motherhood--owing numbers are men. Men responding to the 1990 ABA survey were just as concerned about "time for self/family" as women. And most of the attorneys who commit suicide, abuse alcohol, and suffer from depression are men.

Part-Time Success

Fortunately, there are small-firm success stories to point the way toward a healthy balance between law practice and a life outside work. At the three-person New Jersey firm of Jacobs & Bell, Doreen McManimon, a commercial litigator, has spent the past five years working three days a week. Usually those days are Tuesday, Wednesday, and Friday, but the demands of litigation require her to be flexible. With two caretakers on call for her two children, she can be. "I put in whatever hours are needed to get the work done."

In September, for example, when court heats up again after a lazy summer, McManimon generally works at least four, and often five, days a week. The firm reimburses her on an hourly basis for the extra time.

McManimon explains that commitment and communication are just as critical as flexibility to the success of her arrangement. In her case, the firm's commitment to her part-time arrangement was won the hard way: She quit when she had been with the firm for a year, after the birth of her second child.

The firm spent time and money advertising for a replacement and interviewing applicants. In the end, McManimon says, "They found they would get more out of me working less hours than they would out of someone who was younger for more hours per week. They actually did their own cost-benefit analysis and decided it was worth it for them." (One mitigating factor: The firm's real-estate practice had headed south, and the two partners were willing to see whether a seasoned, flexible part-timer could handle the remaining work.

As for McManimon's own commitment, it has never been stronger. Pregnant now with her third child, she intends to take several months' maternity leave and then return to work, still part-time. Eventually, when she is done having children, she intends to return to full-time work at Jacobs & Bell.

In addition to flexibility and commitment, the other vital ingredient in a successful alternative work arrangement is communication--with others at the firm and with clients.

Communication, after all, is what small firms are supposed to have over big ones: The partners formed the firm because they like one another's style, and their relationship with the associates is modeled on the master/apprentice relationship of the past, with the expectation on both sides that the associate will join the partnership one day.

In fact, McManimon is willing to bet that if communication in a small firm is so poor that a part-time arrangement cannot be forged, "the relationship probably is not going to work in the long run. You're probably not going to be a partner anyway." At her firm, one partner is in on every matter that she handles, not because of her part-time status but because--as with any associate--the partners need to be prepared when she needs their expert advice. On the rare occasions that a partner has to handle a matter in her absence, she says, "My files are so organized that any stranger could walk in and figure them out."

McManimon also makes a point of communicating clearly with clients: "The clients know I work part-time, and they know what days I work."

Her relationships with her clients point up one of the aspects of small-firm practice that make flexibility possible. Unlike a big firm that has corporate clients, McManimon's clients are small businesses. The money these small businesses spend on legal fees comes out of their own pockets. As a result, litigation on their behalf does not take 50 or 80 or 100 hours a week. It takes 5 or 10 hours--amounts of time easily managed by a part-time lawyer.

McManimon's experience disproves die conventional wisdom that litigation, unlike tax or trusts and estates work, cannot be done on a part-time basis.(6) Civil litigation in particular is paper-driven, requiring less time in court than in the office. And plaintiffs' attorneys exercise considerable leeway over when to file papers in court and when to begin discovery.

Also disproving the rule that part-timers can't litigate is the experience of many attorneys who already work part-time--without knowing it. Think of it this way: No attorney is 100 percent available to any client. Attorneys who appear in court on one matter are not working on others, and neither are attorneys who are taking depositions, meeting with clients, or marketing their firm's services.

In fact, perhaps more than any other profession, the practice of law consists of discrete activities that--with a certain willingness and open-mindedness--can be divided up easily. It is this quality that allows older partners to ease out of active practice, retiring gradually--sometimes over a period of years--rather than suddenly. Known as "phased retirement," such gradual easing out is actually a form of part-time work.

Sharing the Load

Other types of flexible work arrangements suitable for the small firm include job sharing and telecommuting. In a job share, two attorneys share a full-time case load. Each can handle half the usual number of matters, or both can work together on every matter, updating each other through e-mail or handwritten records of conversations and meetings, court appearances, and other status changes.

In a telecommuting arrangement, an attorney works partly from home and partly in the office. Telecommuting arrangements commonly require the attorney to work at least one day a week in the office.

One successful telecommuter is Denise Sanders of New Jersey's Kern, Augustine, Conroy & Schoppman, a 12-lawyer firm specializing in health law. Sanders works a full five-day week but spends three days at home to avoid her two-hour round-trip commute. Usually she goes into the office on Tuesdays and Thursdays, but, like McManimon, she is flexible about her work schedule.

"You have to make certain sacrifices, I find, in order to work at home. I have to be ready and willing to come into the office on any day when I'm needed." On average, that happens at least once a month. Since her two children are in full-time day care with grandparents nearby, this is not a problem.

Another form of flexibility: "My home phone number is known by almost all of my clients. I was somewhat afraid at the beginning that when my clients found out they would have to call me at home sometimes, that would be off-putting. But I haven't found that at all."

What makes Sanders' telecommuting arrangement work? "We are completely computerized." In her home office Sanders has a computer with e-mail and modem as well as a fax machine, all supplied by the firm.

"You have to have extremely supportive partners that you're working for," she added. Although she became the firm's first woman attorney when she was recruited in 1991, the partners embraced her telecommuting arrangement from the start. In fact, when the firm upgraded its office equipment, Sanders received a Pentium computer along with everyone else, even though she spends most of her time at home with a laptop.

Why would a small firm invest in a telecommuter like Sanders--or any nontraditional lawyer? The case of Doreen McManimon, who quit rather than work full-time, provides one clear answer: retention. When attorneys are unwilling to work full-time--whether it's to be with small children, try their hand at writing a novel, or take up a new skill--the firm that does not give them a part-time option is going to lose them. The costs associated with replacing a trained and valued attorney can be considerable. They include not only fees for advertising and/or the process of finding candidates for the job, but also valuable time lost to interviewing potential replacements. And, once the new employee is hired, he or she requires training in general office procedures and, far more critical, in specific client matters. This training takes additional time and money.

In the meantime, the departed attorney almost certainly is still practicing, more than likely at a firm that recognizes his or her value and is willing to work out a mutually agreeable schedule. In addition to taking their talents with them, departing attorneys may take some clients from the old firm, for--as we all know--clients form strong attachments to the lawyers who regularly handle their legal work.

In addition to retention, being flexible in response to attorneys' needs can give a small firm the kind of reputation money can't buy. Clients will see the firm as a repository of legal talent that is not concerned only with money. Lawyers working in flexible arrangements, after all, have voted with their feet for something other than the bottom line.

In the community, the firm that permits flexibility will gain a reputation for fairness, continuity, and--above all--a commitment to critical human values. At a time when only 40 percent of the public rates lawyers favorably, compared to 84 percent for teachers and 71 percent for doctors,(7) this is an important asset.

Among younger lawyers and other potential job-seekers, flexibility gives a firm a reputation for openness and commitment to the individual. Indeed, the opportunity to work part-time (or in some other flexible arrangement) may attract an outstanding talent pool of attorneys, including graduates of top schools who have found other practice settings inhospitable to their desire for greater work-life balance.

Firms that permit attorneys to work part-time often discover an unexpected dividend: improved performance. Part-timers' loyalty to a firm that allows them an alternative work schedule is unsurpassed, leading to profound feats of diligence and creativity. As McManimon pointed out, "It was to my advantage to make sure that the part-time arrangement worked."

Many attorneys working in flexible arrangements speak of their firm's endorsement as the moment when they first felt its commitment to them as individuals. And, for some, it was also the moment when they began to give the firm the benefit of their "whole mind," not just their daytime hours.

At the same time as her firm's vote of confidence is boosting the part-timer's feelings of commitment, she may be learning new skills that will enhance her performance as an attorney. If, like many women, she has sought part-time work to spend more time with young children, she is finding that the skills required for successful parenting translate well to die workplace.

These skills include flexibility, speed, openness to compromise, tolerance of chaos, and strong organization and planning ability. As one young mother put it, "Negotiating a settlement with a hostile opponent is nothing compared to taking a two year old to the grocery store."

If part-timers have outside commitments other than children, their legal skills almost certainly will benefit because the best lawyers are well-rounded people who have extensive interests, activities, and contacts outside the law.

All these benefits are doubly true of job-share arrangements. With a job share, the firm enjoys the benefits of having two attorneys' skills and experience in a single position. And job sharers typically provide a firm with year-round coverage because they take vacations at different times.

One of the biggest challenges for any attorney working a flexible schedule, and any firm that has such attorneys, is how to strike an appropriate balance between dedication and time off. Flexibility and willingness to do what it takes are necessary to successful law practice, but they can make a part-time arrangement slip dangerously into full-time work.

One woman who works for a three-attorney Westchester County, New York, law firm spoke of the difficulty of making partners listen when she Just Says No. This woman is supposed to work four days a week for 80 percent of a full-timer's compensation.

In reality, she puts in four 11-hour days Monday through Thursday, and then works at least another two half-days every weekend, with no additional compensation for die extra time. "When I got there, the partner I work for would constantly schedule stuff on Fridays [her day off]. Finally I said to him, `Hey, you're not respecting our arrangement.' He said, `I'm sorry. I forget. It's hard for me to remember."'

The real problem isn't his memory. It's the fact that he hasn't bought into her part-time arrangement, despite approving it when she was hired. "Even though he wouldn't admit it, I think he sees it as a negative as far as my image goes. He doesn't want to see me throw my career away."

Such solicitude can be a double-edged sword: She would be far happier with the extra time than she is with her boss's plans for her career. "I do have a family, and I can't just abandon them for the practice of law. People have to open their minds to the fact that you can be a parent and a good attorney."

By opening their minds in the way she suggests, small-firm practitioners can join the vanguard of lawyers who are imagining a different, better kind of practice--one that allows diem to strike a fulfilling balance between work, family, personal, and community activities.

As Diane Cuddihy, a part-time public defender in Broward County, Florida, put it, "I am going to be a lawyer for the rest of my life, but the kids are going to be little for only a short time."(38)

Balance between work and personal life will not benefit only working mothers. It will benefit every lawyer who ever wanted to go fishing during trout season, take up Chinese cooking, attend every Little League game, participate fully in the town conservation commission, or read Winston Churchill's complete autobiography from beginning to end. And that's a lot of lawyers.

Making It Work

So, how does the small firm get started? There's no need to announce a policy, unless your firm already has a lot of them in place. (In fact, if a relatively policy-free firm suddenly rolls out a flexible work arrangement policy, it's likely to be viewed with skepticism, as something that doesn't quite fit in.) Instead, wait for someone at the firm to request an alternative work arrangement.

In the meantime, don't disparage lawyers at other firms who already work part time. Use the breathing space provided by your own full-timers to research the issue. Many city bar associations and local employers offer resources for employers launching flexible work arrangements. These resources include information services for parents seeking nannies or back-up child core centers for days when regular caregivers can't work.

While every case is--and should be--unique, think about these issues:

* How long must lawyers be at the firm before you feel comfortable letting them work an alternative schedule?

* Will you limit the reasons why they get to work a flexible schedule? For parenting reasons? For caring for a sick relative or friend? Or will you let them work flexible hours for any reason at all, so long as the arrangement meets the needs of clients, the firm, and other staff, as well as the attorney using it?

* How will compensation and benefits be determined?

* Will attorneys working alternative schedules be expected to return to work full time? When?

* Will attorneys working alternative schedules be allowed to return to work full time?

When someone does ask for m alternative work arrangement--and this will happen--it's time for total honesty, with yourself as well as with the employee. Ask yourself: Is this someone I value enough to take the risk? If--and only if--the answer is yes, then discuss:

* How will you evaluate whether or not the arrangement is working? Suggestion: Do three-month and six-month evaluations, and then follow-ups yearly after that. Sound familiar? There's no reason to treat alternative work arrangements any differently than you treat other personnel issues.

* What will it take to maintain open lines of communication? Suggestion: Try to go on as you have before. Obviously, the attorney working an alternative schedule is someone you like and respect. If this weren't the case, you wouldn't have tried it. You should be able to maintain those positive feelings. Be honest, just as you were before. Telling the truth can include sharing your own feelings of ambivalence--although you don't want to doom the arrangement by overburdening the lawyer with your angst. Strike a sensible balance, the way you would with any sensitive issue at the firm.

Take a deep breath. Imagine your law office staffed by professionals who are there because they love what they do. Imagine that they look forward to coming to work every day as much as they look forward to the time they spend at home or in the community. Imagine that your practice is enriched by the contacts they make and the ideas they develop when they're not at work. Imagine that you, too, have a life outside of your work at the firm. Now--just do it.

Notes

(1) Ronald L. Hirsch, The State of the Legal Profession-1990, Address presented at American Bar Association Seminar "At the Breaking Point: The Emerging Crisis in the Quality of Lawyers' Health and Lives" (Apr. 5-6, 1991). (2) Id. (3) Andrew G. Benjamin et al., The Prevalence of Depression, Alcohol Abuse, and Cocaine Abuse Among U.S. Lawyers, 13 INT'L J. PSYCHIATRY 233, 234 (1990). (4) Doretta Zemp, Turned-off Lawyers, STUDENT LAW., Nov. 1981, at 37. (5) Michael King, Lawyers on the Rocks, A.B.A. J., Mar. 1984, at 78. (6) See, e.g., Andrea Sachs, Desperately Seeking Day-care, A.B.A. J., June 1993, at 58. (7) Gary A. Hengstler, Vox Populi, A.B.A. J., Sept. 1993, at 60. (8) Mary Meehan, Cupcakes on the Docket, BARRISTER, 1994, at 14.

Deborah K. Holmes, a nonpracticing attorney, is director of research and advisory services for Catalyst, a nonprofit organization in New York City that works with business and the professions to effect change for women.