Lying With Metrics

I’ve written repeatedly about how easy it is to lie with metrics. Sometimes it’s unintentional. Mostly, I fear, it isn’t.

Consider this survey I received today from an airline for recent travel to a client site – or, rather, two versions of this survey:

Version 1:

Delta Survey 2

Version 2:

Delta Survey 1

Question 1

Which one do you think will result in higher satisfaction scores?

According to research, Version 2, by a considerable amount.

Question 2

If I wanted to show that satisfaction was increasing over time, how could I do that without changing inflight service whatsoever?

Present Version 1 one month, then Version 2 the next. Voila, scores increase dramatically. Or present Version 1 to customers the first few times they fly, then move them to Version 2.

It certainly would be a lot easier than giving customers more legroom.

Now as it happens, I’m relatively satisfied with this airline, and the flight was easy enough. (It didn’t hurt that they moved me up to the front of the bus, either.) And I’m not saying they’re consciously manipulating the layout of the survey… though I also have trouble imagining that they highly paid people putting together these surveys don’t understand the effect of right-to-left or left-to-right ordering of their choices.

Question 3

What’s the right way to do this?

Ah. Interesting question.

Depends on what you’re after. If you absolutely must have a numerical answer – e.g., because the CEO is insisting – then the right way is to use one format, don’t alter the questions, and measure significant changes over time (longitudinal surveying). Chances are, though, if someone is insisting on a numerical answer, either they’re playing games themselves, or they’re too arrogant to listen to your explanations, or you’re too afraid to offer them.

You’ll get a better result by sitting down with a cross-section of the user population and talking honestly with them, asking them about their issues and not trying to confine them to one-dimensional check-the-box answers.

That takes work, though. And offers ambiguous results. And quite often gives you unpleasant feedback – though absent such feedback, you’ll have a hard time figuring out what you can do better.

I’ve had this conversation over the years with various clients who want me to survey their population (of lawyers, etc.). Sometimes they’re genuinely interested in answers, in doing better, which makes for a fun project. And sometimes they just need a number to show their boss… which certainly makes for an easier project.

Five Tools for Busy Professionals

My new book is available on Amazon: Legal Project Management Field Guide: Five Tools for Busy Professionals.

Five Tools CoverYou can read it independently or as a supplement to the original Legal Project Management.

It contains some of the same material as that book, though completely rewritten to focus on the particular tools I discuss, along with considerable new material. For example, I wish I’d given more attention to project charters in the first book. I rectify that here.

As a legal professional, you can manage five aspects of your project – that is, the “stuff” besides the legal work itself:

– The project itself
– Time
– Money
– The team
– The client

The new book details a “tool” (not a technology tool, but a means for making the job easier) for each of these aspects:

– The project charter
– The “Off Switch”
– Budgets
– Giving an assignment effectively
– The Conditions of Satisfaction

Of course, I’m biased, but I think it’s a great new approach to making project management accessible and easy to jump into. There’s a lot more to project management than these five tools, material that I cover in my extended classes and seminars and in the book Legal Project Management. However, these tools provide a significant first step. Employ them, and your projects will leap ahead.

And your stress level will decrease.

One last thing – it’s on sale! No, not just “for sale,” but Amazon is discounting both this book and the first one by 10%, at least in the U.S. I don’t know how long the sale will last,1 so take advantage now. Yeah, you’re only saving about the cost of a latte,2 but consider it the start of much larger savings when you start managing your projects more effectively.

So order it today.3 And when it comes in a few days, take it down to the coffee shop across the street, use the $3 on a latte, and start reading. Get the latte extra hot, and by the time you’ve finished it, you’ll be on your way to better project management. Really.


My New Book Is Available (Almost)

Finally, after three months of production problems, my new book is starting to roll off the presses.

Legal Project Management Field Guide: Five Tools for Busy Professionals will be available on Amazon in about three or four days and at other bookstores shortly afterwards.

I’ll share more about the book as soon as I have confirmation it’s available for sale. I think it’s pretty cool and seriously useful… but I might be just a bit biased.

cover_2b smaller

OT: Server Issues

My web server was having some issues. The hosting company is working on them, but there may be intermittent problems with the Lexician site and our email addresses for a few days. Apologies in advance….

New and Cool to You? Doesn’t Matter (to Your Clients)

I just received a breathless mass email that states:

The all-new website is here! Take a look. Check it out…, and it’s all new! Visit today to [get info and find stuff]. Take this quick tour to get an overview of what’s new [in four bullet points4 and happy sentences]….

Of course it includes links, a colored background, and a stock photo of two happy people and what might be a tree.

I. Don’t. Care. I am a client of the company that sent this, but I don’t care about their website.5

Dear sender, I know it’s something you’ve worked hard on. Very hard. Balancing a lot of internal politics, competing needs, and limited resources. Yup.

So what?

Why does it matter to me?

I assume, if I go to your website, that I’ll be able to do exactly the things those four bullet points tell me I can do. Because any reasonably competent website for your industry will let me do those things. And your old website was not so bad that it was driving away all your clients and you now need to win them back.

Oh, and this was the second such mail. You sent me one a few days ago to tell me to look out for this mail!

The Project Management Connection

When you’re managing a legal project, understand what your clients care about.

You may (and should) care about things like deadlines and staffing and the incredibly hard work and grace under pressure your team has contributed. But before you share that with the client,6 ask yourself, Is this on the client’s top-three list regarding this project?

Sometimes it is. If your client doubts you can deliver, or is curious about (or wants proof of) your project management skills, or insists on knowing everything about everything, then fine – share the info.

Otherwise, figure out what the client thinks is important, and focus your communication efforts on that.

Don’t assume that what matters to you matters to the client. It’s like the old saw about people not wanting to watch the making of either sausages or laws.

Become a Five-Tools Project Manager

My bimonthly article on Slaw, the Canadian law magazine, talks about how to build on five key tools for project success.

Now if I could only find the one tool that would resolve printing issues with my new book so I could release it….

#8 of Ten Not-To-Dos

Today’s not-to-do comes courtesy of Mark Herrmann. He’s the Chief Counsel – Litigation and Global Chief Compliance Officer at Aon, a regular columnist for Above the Law, and usually dead on the money.

Not today.

He rails against one-one-one meetings, but I believe he fails to understand their purpose. So here’s #87 – and remember, this is the don’t-do-it-this-way phrasing: Avoid one-on-ones with your team.

A one-on-one is a powerful and employee-empowering management tool, when used effectively:

  • It’s a regularly scheduled meeting between a manager and her report. The manager can be a project manager or a reporting manager.
  • It should happen weekly until you reach senior levels, then biweekly. (Recognize that schedule issues will cause about one in three to be canceled, which will push these meetings toward the right frequency.)
  • It needn’t be long. Sometimes fifteen minutes is enough, especially for a manager-report pair where both parties are be-brief-be-brilliant-be-gone. If you schedule them for longer, neither party should be shy about ending early.
  • The agenda belongs to the report, not the manager. 

    #8: One-on-ones reflect the report’s agenda, not the manager’s.

  • Let me repeat that last bullet. The agenda belongs to the report, not the manager. This is critical, and it’s the part Mark Herrmann misses. People need guaranteed time with their busy manager to bring up issues, seek help with roadblocks, receive coaching, feel supported, ask questions, make cross-company connections, all of the above, and anything else on the report’s mind. If the manager has an item she wants to bring up, reserve time at the end of the one-on-one – though you’ll discover how often that same item is on the report’s list as well. Some managers like to see an agenda in advance. I wasn’t one of them, but it’s a personal preference.8

Don’t blow off one of the easiest and most effective tools in your management arsenal – no, your leadership arsenal.

Our list so far, phrased as the right thing rather than the not-to-do behind it:

  1. Don’t multitask. Focus.
  2. Don’t avoid opportunities to help others.
  3. Don’t let reviews become either blamefests or mutual backscratching.
  4. Don’t “know” what you don’t know.
  5. Don’t make it up.
  6. Don’t assign action items to no one in particular.
  7. Don’t blow off questions of responsibility.
  8. Don’t shortchange your reports by avoiding regular one-on-ones.

(Two more to go, but it may be slow. The past few days I’ve been rechecking proofs of my new book and working with a publisher on specs for the one beyond that.)

Building Leaders

Slate is running an interesting article on GE’s management-training program.

One key paragraph regarding their Crotonville Managment Training Center, where up-and-coming managers attend a two-week training course:

Even during the depths of the financial crisis, when it could have easily chosen to slash this cost center, GE kept Crotonville running at full bore. And [CEO] Jeff Immelt makes the helicopter trip from the company’s Fairfield, Connecticut, headquarters to greet every new class of management trainees. There may be no more data-driven corporation in the world than GE, and—though it’s difficult to quantify the precise value of an improved executive class—for more than half a century the company has done the math and deemed Crotonville a smart investment.

Microsoft, too, ran these types of programs when it was at the top of its game.9 So do other companies.

Training matters. (And good training is more than listening to a dry lecture while collecting CLE credits.)

Believe in the future of your legal practice, and invest in those who will carry it into the future.

#7 of Ten Not-To-Dos

Today’s don’t-do-that, like Friday’s, comes courtesy of the General Motors internal investigation for the Cobalt.

(I should note that there are things to like about GM, and that I drive a GM car. The inside-baseball behaviors that the GM internal investigation has revealed are endemic at many organizations.)

One witness described the GM phenomenon of avoiding responsibility as the ‘GM salute,’ a crossing of the arms and pointing outward towards others, indicating that the responsibility belongs to someone else, not me.

Okay, so the GM Salute is an ugly blow-off, but what should you do when the question comes up and you believe it’s not your responsibility?

a. Do the GM Salute mentally while looking around with a blank stare.
b. Do nothing. Any movement might give you away – or, worse, “volunteer” you as the problem-solver.
c. Affirmatively say, “This isn’t my area.” Maybe even follow that with, “I don’t want to step on anyone else’s toes.”
d. When it’s clear no one in the room owns it, say, “Let’s take an action item to find out. Who’s got this?”
e. If it’s your meeting, get a volunteer or appoint someone to find out.

I hope you’ll see the last two as the best answers. 

#7: Don’t avoid responsibility. If you don’t know who owns it, ensure someone owns finding out.

Many people are scared of choice d) because the obvious response from someone else is, “This is clearly important to you, so why don’t you take it on?” In other words, it’s akin to volunteering, and you already have enough work.

First, in well-functioning organizations, it’s not akin to volunteering. There will be any number of people stepping up with the same question, and the task will go to someone with a good likelihood of coming up with an answer. If that’s you, great – then you’re the right person.

Second, while in dysfunctional groups you will have in effect volunteered, consider it an opportunity. Problem solvers get noticed, become the go-to people in their organizations. And unless leadership is completely clueless, either you’ll start moving up or others will start taking responsibility as well, or both. (If your managers are truly clueless, are you really where you want to be? If you have other options, consider exploring them.)

If a serious issue is raised in a meeting, ensure it becomes an action item with due date for someone, even if that someone is you.

Our list so far, phrased as the right thing rather than the not-to-do behind it:

  1. Don’t multitask. Focus.
  2. Don’t avoid opportunities to help others.
  3. Don’t let reviews become either blamefests or mutual backscratching.
  4. Don’t “know” what you don’t know.
  5. Don’t make it up.
  6. Don’t assign action items to no one in particular.
  7. Don’t blow off questions of responsibility.

#6 of Ten Not-To-Dos

Today, it’s GM that offers a lead-in for the next in my list of work methods worth avoiding.

#6: Don’t follow a “decision” in a meeting with action items, responsibility, and due dates.

GM meetings, according to the recently released report on the Chevy Cobalt ignition switch mess, abounded with something called the GM Nod:

Mary Barra described a phenomenon known as the ‘GM Nod.’ The GM nod, Barra described, is when everyone nods in agreement on a proposed plan of action, but then leaves the room with no intention to follow through.

It’s not a GM-only phenomenon. I’ve seen it in meetings in many places, including law firms.

Someone records the meeting minutes, but nothing actually happens.

One of the biggest time-wasters in a meeting is to take minutes. Minutes belong to formal institutions. Meetings instead need the following:

  • A list of decisions taken and tasks assigned
  • For each decision or task (a/k/a action item), the person responsible for seeing it through, and the date by which the next major action is due.

#6: Follow-through. In a meeting, every decision must have a person responsible and a due date.

If you’re using onscreen visuals for the meeting, interrupt them. If possible, project instead the screen of whoever is recording the decisions/action items. Type out those three items – decision/action item, person responsible, due date – right on the screen in front of everyone.

Now, everyone sees who’s on the hook. And that person also sees the assignment clearly, and either announces any misgivings about the date and renegotiates immediately, or they (and everyone else) know what they have to do.

Yeah, occasionally something will come up and a date will be missed.10 But if you get the percentage of follow-through from, say, 50% up to 90%, that’s dramatic progress.

Our list so far:

  1. Don’t multitask. Focus.
  2. Don’t avoid opportunities to help others.
  3. Don’t let reviews become either blamefests or mutual backscratching.
  4. Don’t “know” what you don’t know.
  5. Don’t make it up.
  6. Don’t assign action items to no one in particular.11

Have a great weekend. More next week.


  1. Amazon is doing it, not me.

  2. The universal comparator in Seattle.

  3. Please. So I can feed my kids. Okay, I’m only kidding about that part, but do order it soon.

  4. One of which has an editing error.

  5. Actually, I might personally care a little bit in a professional sense, since I was responsible for a good chunk of for a year, but I’m simply stating that in the interest of full disclosure.

  6. Or even, to some extent, with your own management.

  7. I had to rejigger the list a bit but I wanted to address this issue

  8. I didn’t ask for one because I felt that moved a quantum of power from report to manager and I wanted these sessions to be as employee-empowering as possible.

  9. They were generally a series of one-week high-intensity programs rather than a single two-week session.

  10. And there will always be a few turkeys who just blow it off. Most of the time, their careers will not progress to where they can do even more damage.

  11. Edited Friday 9:20 PDT to make the wording of this item parallel the others in the list.