UU裸聊直播

What is the point of an in-house legal team? To solve legal problems for the business?  Undeniably. To minimise risk and guide the business through the maze of global regulations?  Absolutely.

An in-house lawyer鈥檚 knowledge and expertise is critical. However, research by Cranfield Business School found these benefits added greater value when they also helped the business generate revenue and reduce the loss of margin. By analysing the most effective in-house legal teams, the researcher found that in-house lawyers need to take on more 鈥榮trategic鈥� leadership roles. In doing this, they help drive the organisation's business objectives and therefore become better valued.

But how do we define leadership? And what does it mean to be strategic? Leadership expert Dr Paul Hughes from the Center for Creative Leadership explored this question, focusing on the role of the in-house leader.

For starters, lawyers need to challenge the view that they are simply in-house lawyers operating within in-house legal teams. They need to broaden how they see themselves and focus on how they can help guide their teams towards shaping their company, so that it becomes more efficient and more profitable.

Good leadership gets people working together and producing better results. It includes the exchanges between in-house legal leaders and their direct reports or other group members, as well as the interactions with peers inside and outside the in-house legal function. This brings a heavy importance to the quality of the relationships found throughout the organisation. 

Leadership does not come solely from a position of authority, and it鈥檚 not simply a hierarchical role based on knowledge. An in-house legal leader needs to influence the people they are responsible for, along with the complex organisational system they are a part of.

Effective leadership creates three outcomes:

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Direction: Set a clear goal, agreement, or objective that you can work towards as a group. Where are you taking your team? How are you going to get there?

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Alignment: Ensure that every step to success is in service of this shared goal. Alignment must include every aspect of the work that goes into achieving the goal.

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Commitment: Everyone needs to be on the same page, and committed to achieving success as a group. Once people are committed to each other, they can commit to the goal.

With these guiding principles in mind, groups or teams can work together to improve the quality of their leadership while also pursuing a shared goal which is beneficial to the business. The focus is on the outcome of the group, rather than the effectiveness of individual leaders. Group leadership doesn鈥檛 happen because of one person - it happens when the leader and group work together.

The steps to achieving effective leadership are clear. They must ensure that the direction, alignment and commitment within the group support the shared aim of benefiting the organisation. The leadership role becomes less about being in a position of authority, and more about ensuring leadership is created and maintained within the group. With this mindset, the quality of the relationships the leader has within their organisation, and beyond, become much more important.

This also applies to the strategic in-house leader - a person who intentionally influences people and resources, both inside and outside the in-house legal function; actively driving organisational change when necessary. What makes these actions strategic is their:

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Scope: Seeking to impact the value of the wider organisation, including the impact on customers, suppliers, and other connected stakeholders.

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Duration: Focusing on long- and short-term goals.

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Change: Driving organisational change in service of goals and objectives, and then implementing that change.

But how can a strategic in-house leader drive this change, especially when confronted with the complexity of an organisation? They need to approach their leadership with the following:

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Strategic thinking: They must understand their unique role in the organisation, and appreciate why creating value is beneficial for them, both personally and professionally.

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Strategic acting: Their behaviour impacts how they are perceived within their organisation. Understanding this is the first step to turning it to their advantage.

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Strategic influencing: A leader must create wide-reaching value for their organisation, even if it鈥檚 not connected to their normal value-generating role.

Strategic in-house leadership is hard to directly measure, and may not attract immediate recognition or reward. With little immediate incentive, it can be easy to fall into a solely functional perspective. In-house leaders may also find themselves in situations where they are not the expert, due to few resources, limited time, or deadlines.

However, global management consulting firm McKinsey argues that CFOs are usually perceived as highly strategic. They are often promoted, not only because they鈥檙e the expert on many topics, but because they can work across organisational boundaries, in support of the organisation's strategy. Strategic in-house lawyers have similar opportunities and can be well-perceived for the very same reasons.

There is value in this mindset, for in-house leaders and their organisations. But how does the idea become reality? It鈥檚 down to individual in-house leaders and the steps they take to develop strategic thinking, acting and influencing. This usually begins with an in-house leader who wishes to develop themselves. But it cannot be accomplished in isolation.

Strategic in-house leadership is a collective exercise, and any planning should include steps to develop others as well. There are practical steps towards achieving this:

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Make time to learn outside perspectives and ask how other departments or divisions would approach a particular scenario, then test out this thinking as a group.

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Form a team charter that outlines exactly how the group is actively supporting the aims and goals of the organisation.

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Help team members simplify their work language, limiting the use of unique jargon, acronyms and processes so information can be translated and easily understood.

It鈥檚 important to develop an understanding of what is required to be a strategic in-house leader. But development does not end with people. The conditions for a culture change must also be created. Practical steps include:

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Share team charters across different groups, and create shared charters that outline how the team can actively support the organisation鈥檚 aims, together.

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Utilise one-to-one relationships across the organisation, with mentor and project partnership arrangements.

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Invite other groups or leaders to join team meetings and encourage them to weigh in and share their knowledge.

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Allow team members to shadow each other, rotate jobs, swap roles, or change locations for an extended period of time.

鈼�&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫;&苍产蝉辫; Seek out conflicting ideas, and learn how these can be managed practically.

Developing actions, thinking, and influence over other people will add greater value to the organisation and lead the way for more like-minded individuals. 

But simply becoming an in-house leader is only the beginning. Traversing a complex organisational landscape where conflicting priorities arise daily is the next big step.

When faced with the conflicting demands that emerge from a chaotic organisational ecosystem, in-house leaders are forced to navigate certain tensions and dilemmas. These dilemmas can often present ongoing, unsolvable situations that must be routinely addressed. They differ from general problems, which may have clear answers and solutions, in that they contain seemingly opposing ideas.

Organisations and individuals that effectively manage these dilemmas perform far better than those that do not. This means it鈥檚 crucial that an in-house leader is able to correctly address and manage them.

The following are examples of some impossible to answer questions that might occur within an organisation:

The answers to these questions and dilemmas are not obvious and one decision can impact another. But In-house leaders can manage these conflicts with a strategic perspective. By doing this, they鈥檒l support the move towards the wider goals of their organisation.

An example of one of these impossible dilemmas is the argument between home working vs office working.

Many employees are becoming polarised when it comes to their working preferences, with some favouring 100% office working, and others hybrid working. Those on both sides of the argument focus on the positive aspects of their own position, versus the negative aspects of the other. Neither side can see the whole picture.

 After seeing a debate played out, the in-house leader needs to reframe the situation and work to focus groups on one shared aim. This new aim might be to create a productive and engaged workforce, dealing with the main negatives shared by both groups, but the crux of this idea of leadership should be about taking both opposing views into account.

It is not enough to manage localised issues with localised solutions. These issues should instead be regarded as early warning indicators of a more systemic problem arising from two conflicting viewpoints.

With this reframing, leaders can stop attempting to resolve the conflicts one at a time, and instead pursue them jointly. It is then possible to produce an outcome far better than one that tackles each demand separately.

In his book 鈥淥pposable Mind,鈥� Roger Martin examines how successful business leaders have 鈥渢he predisposition [...] to hold two diametrically opposing ideas in their heads鈥�. He goes on to explain how this lets them 鈥減roduce a synthesis that is superior to either opposing idea.鈥�

While this mindset can be developed, it remains difficult to spot dilemmas when they first arise. It is far more effective to avoid getting stuck on one side of any polarised debate. Leaders step back and view the whole picture.

The question 鈥淲hich side should you focus on?鈥� isn鈥檛 the right one: leaders need to take both sides into account. They must move away from either/or thinking. Once they do, they鈥檒l lose the fear of the consequences that come from picking sides.

There are a number of ways that an in-house leader can influence other stakeholders, shifting the way they approach situations or the actions they take. 

We will focus on one: the Polarities Management Framework鈩�. The core component of which is the Polarity Map鈩�. It helps stakeholders understand a dilemma and creates a common space for them to work together to solve it.

Working on this map together, as a group, allows stakeholders to develop a new perspective on the wider organisation and gain an understanding of the positive and negative aspects of each pole. It also encourages stakeholders to identify the symptoms of the dilemmas they face.

The steps to using the map are:

1. Help demonstrate why there is a dilemma in the first place. Stakeholders are asked to name their conflicting positions, with one being placed on the left of the map, and the other on the right. They must work to understand what they鈥檙e all working towards and what they鈥檙e trying to avoid. The value of this step comes from giving the stakeholders the ability to agree on some common ground. This in turn provides a meaningful reason to put in the effort - in short, 鈥渨hat鈥檚 in it for us and why should we care?鈥�

2. Actively work through the positives and negatives of both sides of the conflict. This creates an understanding of the other side, and vice versa. Outlining the early warning signs also demonstrates how a different conflict might be arising. This helps separate the people from the problem. Everyone working on the map gains a level of empathy for one another, which might have been more difficult if the dilemma had been left unresolved.

3. Accept that, while there have been some breakthroughs in understanding each side, there is still a long way to go. Stakeholders must decide on, and carry out, tangible actions. Responsibilities should be assigned, objectives made clear, and follow-ups carried out to ensure success.

4. The in-house leader must take responsibility for ensuring stakeholders can learn from the process. Creating a process that allows stakeholders to reflect on their work will help them identify every strength, weakness, and area for improvement.

It is clear that the way for the strategic in-house leader to develop their skills and better influence the wider organisation is to take a step back and view the whole picture. They will then be in a better position to use their influence to help others do the same, and create a better way forward.

This comes from intentionally using the practices and perspectives outlined here, and then developing these skills through real-world experiences with various stakeholders and situations. Leadership, therefore, should be considered more of a verb than a noun, and its meaning determined by actions taken.

Taking the practical steps to make it real has never been easier. Like all leadership development, practical experience is the best tutor.