Category Added in a WPeMatico Campaign
Ed. Note: Welcome to our daily feature Trivia Question of the Day!
According data collected as part of the Am Law 100 ranking, which Biglaw firm had the biggest increase in revenue per lawyer in 2020 over 2019?
Hint: Revenue per lawyer went up an impressive 21.9 percent last year.
See the answer on the next page.
The Next Generation ACO Model is ending Dec. 31, the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services said last week. Accountable care organizations — which are comprised of healthcare stakeholders working together to provide coordinated, high-quality care and rein in costs — were quick to register their disappointment.
Launched Jan. 1, 2016, the model is an initiative for experienced ACOs. The model enables participants to assume higher levels of financial risk and reward than are available under the Medicare Shared Savings Program. There are currently 41 participating ACOs.
The model consists of three initial performance years and two optional one-year extensions. The National Association of ACOs has been urging the federal government to make it a permanent part of the Shared Savings Program. Last year, the Trump administration agreed to extend the model through at least 2021.
Last week, Biden’s CMS sent a letter to participants saying it would not extend the model beyond this year, Modern Healthcare reported.
The agency will allow Next Generation model participants to apply for the Global and Professional Direct Contracting Model, a set of two voluntary risk-sharing options. But applications for this model were paused last month.
Proponents of the Next Generation model, like the National Association of ACOs, say that it is a successful program. In 2019, Medicare ACOs generated $3.2 billion in gross savings and $1.4 billion in savings after accounting for shared savings payments, shared loss payments and discounts to CMS, according to a report released by the association at the end of April.
But evaluations conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago, an independent research organization, found that the model did not generate net savings for Medicare. The most recent report, released last September, showed that the model reduced gross Medicare spending by 0.9% but increased net spending by 0.3%, after accounting for shared savings payments.
Though the National Association of ACOs did not directly reference the NORC report, they did say that they “disagree with findings in formal evaluations, which we believe were flawed,” in a May 21 statement.
Other supporters of the model point to the ACOs’ handling of the pandemic as a reason to extend the program.
The Next Generation ACOs “deployed the necessary infrastructure, information sharing, waivers, and tools to respond to and prevent the spread of disease” during the Covid-19 pandemic, experts argued in an article published in Health Affairs in April.
Further, there was a 16% increase in the use of annual wellness visits in the most recent NORC evaluation compared to results revealed in a previous report, which similarly showed the model did not generate net savings. Initially, the Trump administration did not want to extend the model through 2021 citing the previous report’s results, according to the Health Affairs article. But the administration eventually relented, largely due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
The National Association of ACOs has said it will continue advocating for a permanent, Next Generation-like ACO model “that provides a better bridge between MSSP Enhanced [track] and the full capitation option under Direct Contracting.”
Photo: vaeenma, Getty Images
(Photo by Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images for ULTA Beauty / KKW Beauty)
I think she’s gonna be an unbelievable attorney and she’s already one of the best advocates that we have in criminal justice.
She takes these cases seriously. It’s embarrassing to go into a meeting with Kim Kardashian, you’re the attorney and she’s not and she knows more than you by far, and that happens all the time.
She is just extraordinary, and people are just going to have to reassess — she is not that kid that used to party with Paris Hilton.
— CNN anchor Van Jones, gushing about Kim Kardashian and her aptitude for being a lawyer, during a recent appearance on The Ellen Degeneres Show. “She’s doing amazing,” the Yale-educated attorney added, commenting on Kardashian’s legal studies as she readies herself to take the bar exam. “She has used her platform to help people behind bars. Her dad [the late Robert Kardashian Sr.] was a lawyer, and she always wanted to be a lawyer.”
Staci Zaretsky is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she’s worked since 2011. She’d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.
Why are sewer covers round? Tech companies looking to hire smart and innovative thinkers have asked this and other similar questions during interviews to see how potential hires think. (Spoiler alert: the main reason for round sewer covers is that it’s the only shape that cannot fall into the sewer). While a seemingly complex question, it is rather simple and makes sense once you know the answer.
Could a machine discover the answer to the reason sewer covers are round? Certainly, if a human had programmed it to know the answer. But could that machine understand the reason why, taking into account the purposes, use, access, and design considerations that would get it to the answer? Probably not.
Last month, I shared that attorneys should not fear obsolescence from the surge of technologies present in the market, but rather embrace tech to take on the more mundane, repeatable tasks to free up time for attorneys to spend on more value-driving work. Here are some areas that law firms and attorneys can focus on, while they leave the more boring tasks to the robots.
Enable More Value-Adding Work For Clients
Last year’s Wolters Kluwer Future Ready Lawyer survey revealed that client relationships are changing, and more is expected from outside counsel. As more corporate legal departments experience increased pressure to cut costs post-pandemic, it’s likely that this trend will continue. Diving deeper into clients’ goals and business objectives can help law firms gain a better understanding of which tasks for their client can be automated, and where they should increase the time and resources spent on value-adding work. Technology can be applied to map regulatory changes, and knowledge management and project management tools can help organize research and work product for a client engagement; this could free up time for a discerning attorney to conduct a detailed analysis of the market factors impacting the client’s industry, and contextualize that advice so that the client can make the best decisions.
In a recent discussion with Mark Brennan, Global Lead Innovation and Legaltech Partner at Hogan Lovells, he mentioned, “Our clients want us to be strategic advisors, not just good lawyers. To do this, we must be connected to their business and understand their specific needs. Listening, collaborating, and then providing key insights and perspectives in response is paramount.”
Leverage Technology To Quantify Risk And Outcomes
Now more than ever, there is a wide range of data available that can help quantify and inform specific decisions that are meaningful to a client. Analytics about judges, probabilities of securing a specific motion, or understanding more of what is “market” for a deal term are more knowable than ever. While machines are capable of producing this information, attorneys can add value by becoming experts in leveraging this information to provide their clients with insights tailored to their needs and goals.
Law firms and attorneys can shift more of their advice to discuss the practical aspects of legal risk and business risk, including the possible scenarios and potential outcomes. These conversations can leverage the output of systems and technology, but they are conversations that require human intelligence.
Leverage Emotional Intelligence
One of the great things about technology is that computers are very literal and will provide a “technically correct” answer — but there’s a host of interpersonal interactions with clients that simply require a human.
For example, if a client asks a firm to reduce their rates on an engagement, what are they really asking? Is this really a request to do the work outlined but charge less? Perhaps, but it is good to understand the reason why. Perhaps there are other factors in play. By understanding what is really being asked, a firm might propose a mix of less experienced attorneys, a different timeline, a reduced scope, or a shared risk-and-reward model to meet the needs of the client.
Attorneys focused on value can leverage emotional intelligence and their knowledge of clients — including personalities, the needs of the client and the goals of their organization –- to provide value.
Find Ways To Partner With Clients On The Solutions They Need
With the rise of legal operations, it’s becoming more common for corporate legal departments to adopt tech tools in-house to drive down spend on outside counsel; but as many of us know, not every tech tool we try is guaranteed to fit our needs perfectly. Law firms have the unique advantage of understanding what’s out in the market, what’s working for other clients — and can even find ways to leverage their perspective to make recommendations tailored to their clients’ needs.
“Giving clients the opportunity and platform to collaborate with one another can greatly strengthen the relationship,” Brennan said. “This was the impetus for our Innovation Greenhouse at Hogan Lovells, an intimate group of clients we invited to join a one-year journey to explore issues related to innovation, spark mutually beneficial dialogue, and hear unique perspectives. Our clients have responded in an overwhelmingly positive way to this opportunity.”
Commenting on my previous article via LinkedIn, Hugh Logue, analyst at Outsell, said, “There is a latent demand for legal services that cannot be viably met with the existing legal services business model, and opening up this demand through legal tech will actually create jobs in the legal sector.” In the near term, technology can help bridge the gap between legal services and available legal talent, to keep up with demand; but in the long term, it will free up more time to help attorneys leverage their resources for more value-adding work for the benefit of their clients.
Ken Crutchfield is Vice President and General Manager of Legal Markets at Wolters Kluwer Legal & Regulatory U.S., a leading provider of information, business intelligence, regulatory and legal workflow solutions. Ken has more than three decades of experience as a leader in information and software solutions across industries. He can be reached at ken.crutchfield@wolterskluwer.com.
(Photo by Demetrius Freeman-Pool/Getty Images)
Safe to say that U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson is pissed. Last week she delivered an epic benchslap, ordering the DOJ to cough up its communications on how to spin the Mueller Report to Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. And when the government appealed her decision last night, she unredacted the portions of her own memorandum opinion summarizing exactly what the Department was trying valiantly to keep hidden.
TL, DR? Bill Barr told a shit ton of lies.
It all started on Friday, March 22, 2019, when Robert Mueller finally handed in his homework. The Special Counsel was very careful to say that, while he was unable to find evidence that Trump coordinated with Russia to ratf*ck the election, he was not going to opine as to whether the president had obstructed justice out of fear that “a federal criminal accusation against a sitting President would place burdens on the President’s capacity to govern and potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct.”
In plain English, Mueller said that he was neither able to clear the president because of the possible criminal nature of the conduct uncovered in the investigation, nor was he able to prosecute him due to the DOJ’s position that a sitting president could not be indicted. And so he was handing the matter off to congress to decide.
Barr immediately lurched out in front of the microphones to announce that poor Robert Mueller, former head of the FBI and a longtime prosecutor, had been flummoxed by the evidence before him. He just couldn’t make a decision whether or not to prosecute, even when he tried to clear his mind by disregarding the OLC memo saying that a sitting president can’t be indicted. So the Special Counsel was deputizing Barr himself to make a prosecutorial judgment, and, hey wouldn’t you know it, Barr and his team were giving Trump a clean bill of health and deciding not to prosecute.
Literally none of that was true, as we all discovered three weeks later when the 448-page report was released. But the president and his allies used that time to spin the report as exculpatory, when in fact it carefully laid out several possible grounds for an obstruction charge.
Meanwhile, CREW filed a FOIA suit to shake loose the internal DOJ deliberations undergirding the Barr’s announcement and the letter he sent to congress memorializing it. Which leads us to the instant issue regarding a March 24, 2019 memo “from” Steven Engel in the OLC and PADAG Ed O’Callaghan.
The DOJ argued that the memo was drafted to help Barr decide whether to prosecute Trump for obstruction of justice — an odd position because literally everyone involved agreed from the jump that a sitting president could not be indicted. And indeed when Judge Jackson forced the Department to let her review the documents in camera, they said something else entirely.
The DOJ wasn’t deciding whether or not to prosecute Trump. They were retconning a hypothetical declination of prosecution for a fictional civilian Trump who didn’t have an OLC memo declaring him above the law. And Engel and O’Callaghan were very clear that they were making this decision to spare Trump the ignominy of having Mueller’s meticulous evidence of obstruction hanging over him like a gun in the first act:
Although the Special Counsel recognized the unfairness of levying an accusation against the President without bringing criminal charges, the Report’s failure to take a position on the matters described therein might be read to imply such an accusation if the confidential report were released to the public. Therefore, we recommend that you examine the report to determine whether prosecution would be appropriate.
Left unsaid, or perhaps still redacted, is that this clean bill of health would serve as a convenient shield should congress get any dangerous ideas about taking up Mueller’s explicit suggestion that it had the constitutional obligation to adjudicate presidential misconduct.
As Judge Jackson said in a portion of her May 3 memo unredacted today, “DOJ made a strategic decision to pretend as if the first portion of the memorandum was not there and to avoid acknowledging that what the writers were actually discussing was how to neutralize the impact of the Report in the court of public opinion.”
For an entire year, the DOJ has argued that the deliberative process privilege entitles it to withhold communications regarding the government’s decision not to prosecute the president. And now that they’ve been caught lying, they’re still saying it.
Yeah, don’t faint.
“In retrospect, the government acknowledges that its briefs could have been clearer, and it deeply regrets the confusion that caused,” the Department argues in a motion for stay of the order to disclose pending appeal. Apologizing for “imprecision in its characterization of the decisional process,” the government insists that the deliberative process privilege still applies even when the issue is a hypothetical scenario back-formulated to justify a decision already taken by the AG.
And in a move sure to impress Her Honor, the DOJ shrugs off the bad fact that the announcement of the decision was drafted before the memo justifying it was complete, likening it to a judge deciding a case and deputizing her clerk to draft an order.
“The law clerk’s draft remains predecisional because the judge after reading the analysis, can still be persuaded or dissuaded by the analysis and reach a different conclusion,” the government insists. Because it has to.
The DOJ is not about to set a precedent that makes it easier to FOIA the attorney general’s communications. Bill Barr has done enough damage to the Department — they’re certainly not going to let him decimate the deliberative process privilege, too.
And with the judiciary stocked with adherents of the unitary executive theory, they’ll probably get away with it. But it’s gonna be ugly.
CREW v. DOJ [Docket via Court Listener]
Elizabeth Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics.
Kinney Recruiting is working closely with a large firm in Richmond, Virginia, on a confidential search for a litigation associate with two (2) to five (5) years of experience.
The ideal candidate would have experience practicing with a large law firm’s litigation practice on civil litigation matters, such as general commercial litigation, white-collar defense and litigation, and real estate litigation.
This is a fantastic opportunity for a candidate who has relocated (or wishes to relocate) to Richmond after having practiced in a large metropolitan area. Admission to the Virginia bar is required. For confidential consideration, submit your resume or send a note to jobs@kinneyrecruiting.com.
As the current kerfuffle about patent rights and the COVID-19 vaccines demonstrates, IP is a global game. One area of the world that has traditionally been underrepresented in terms of IP discussion is the Middle East, particularly the Gulf States and Saudi Arabia. Yes, my parent’s place of birth and the Arab world’s largest country, Egypt, made some IP news a few years ago, by refusing to grant patents for Gilead’s Hep-C cure, Solvadi. And Israel has long-enjoyed a reputation for innovation as the Start-Up Nation. But when it comes to thinking about other countries in the region, the public perception of those states as petro-economies — rather than innovation hubs — has been well-settled.
But the situation is changing, spurred on by a number of factors. First, the increased presence of global sporting events being hosted in the Gulf States, from Formula 1 races to big-purse golf events to the upcoming 2022 World Cup. These events signify an opening-up of the Gulf States, including the UAE and Saudi Arabia, to international tourism. Second and perhaps more importantly, the Gulf States are in the midst of a pivot from oil-based economies toward more outside investment-focused ones, using the cash flow generated by the sale of oil to invest more broadly in different industries worldwide. Which necessarily means investing in innovation, considering how much of the value of companies resides in their intellectual property nowadays. Indeed, increased investment ties around innovation has been credited as an impetus for the Abraham Accords between Israel and the UAE, which has led to the Abu Dhabi Investment Office opening its first overseas office in Israel.
While economic normalization between Saudi Arabia and Israel has not yet followed suit, the Saudi’s have a long history of investing in the United States — particularly in the real estate and defense industries. Lately, however, the Saudi sovereign wealth fund has announced a number of major investments in U.S. companies, including both Uber and electric car maker Lucid Motors — signifying a broadening range of investment at least in terms of industries targeted. It makes sense, of course, for the kingdom to diversify away from full reliance on gasoline-using autos and trucks, just as the U.S. auto industry itself has been moving toward electric vehicle technologies. Moreover, there remains a huge opportunity for Gulf State investors to invest in other intellectual property-driven assets, from start-up companies looking to commercialize their nascent technologies to straight-up IP licensing along the lines of a France Brevets or Japan’s IP Bridge.
There is no doubt that opportunity abounds on the IP front for cash-rich Gulf State investors. At the same time, the historical lack of focus on IP issues in the regions puts the onus on the Gulf States to demonstrate a commitment to protecting IP rights in their own nations. To that end, a recent article notes “the Saudi government established the Saudi Authority for Intellectual Property (SAIP) to be Saudi Arabia’s competent authority for intellectual property. SAIP is considered a ‘one-stop-shop’ for all matters relating to the protection, regulation, and enforcement of intellectual property rights in Saudi Arabia.” For a country like Saudi Arabia, centralizing handling of IP affairs is a key step toward developing a cohesive IP strategy, both in terms of developing an internal IP knowledge base and infrastructure, as well as with respect to forging ties with other IP offices worldwide.
Every indication is that the Saudis have started taking those steps in earnest. In addition to reaching agreement with leading worldwide patent offices on cooperative efforts around patent prosecution and data-sharing, the Saudis have engaged in a robust IP piracy crackdown effort, leading to the shutdown of over 350 pirate sites thus far in 2021. Similarly, it was announced that the UAE was taken off an IP watchlist, due to its efforts on the anti-counterfeiting front.
On top of those regional IP enforcement efforts, the Saudis also “organized the IP20+ Global Intellectual Property Challenges Forum, convening the heads of IP offices in G20 countries.” An event of that importance heralds a clear turning point in Saudi attention to IP issues, as part of a drive to position the them as the regional leader in that area.
At the same time, it will be very interesting to see what steps the Saudis and the other Gulf States take in terms of partnering with existing IP experts in order to reach their investment goals. While they are surely engaged in the worthy effort of developing internal expertise on IP issues, my personal experience with clients located in Dubai suggests that there is a lot of opportunity for collaboration between Western IP expertise and Gulf State IP investors. Whether those investors gravitate to IP experts with an inherent understanding of Middle Eastern culture and business practices is an open question. But IP lawyers would be remiss if they ignored the opportunities presented by the increased awareness of IP in the region.
Ultimately, becoming a global player in the IP space is not something that will happen overnight, despite the tremendous financial wherewithal that the Gulf States can bring to the table. It would be a mistake, however, to discount the tremendous strides that these countries have already made to position themselves in the IP conversation going forward, both in terms of direct investment in innovation and as a bridge between West and East. It is not hard to imagine the day in the near-future where stops in Riyadh, Abu Dhabi, and Dubai become as important for the global IP lawyer as Frankfurt, London, and Hong Kong — to the extent it is not happening already. As the world transitions to a more climate-friendly economy, it is great to see some of the leading beneficiaries of fossil fuels jumping on board the innovation train. Because closing the IP gulf promises benefits for the entire world.
Please feel free to send comments or questions to me at gkroub@kskiplaw.com or via Twitter: @gkroub. Any topic suggestions or thoughts are most welcome.
Gaston Kroub lives in Brooklyn and is a founding partner of Kroub, Silbersher & Kolmykov PLLC, an intellectual property litigation boutique, and Markman Advisors LLC, a leading consultancy on patent issues for the investment community. Gaston’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.
There really should be some sort of independent ombudsperson role in state governments that tell officials like Ron DeSantis that he can’t waste taxpayer money on stupid symbolic legislation.
Yesterday, the performance artist doing business as the governor of Florida signed the Stop Social Media Censorship Act into law, leveling fines upwards of $250K per day on social media platforms that shut down the accounts of candidates for political office or “censor, deplatform, or shadow ban” any “journalistic enterprise,” a term defined to include entities that “Publish[] in excess of 100,000 words available online with at least 50,000 paid subscribers or 100,000 monthly active users” which is a bar that this website catering to attorneys and law students clears in less than a week to give you a sense of how tiny a niche publication would have to be to get protected by this law.
Is there anything constitutional about this law? Nope! But since conservatives have achieved stunning success in convincing people that Twitter bans are a First Amendment issue — they are not — it was only a matter of time until a state passed legislation like this to capitalize on the Free Speech fantasy they’ve spun for months.
Because while private entities like Twitter and Facebook banning users is entirely constitutional, forcing those private actors to broadcast particular users over their platforms is absolutely not constitutional. And yet here we are in up-is-now-down-land.
“This is so obviously unconstitutional, you wouldn’t even put it on an exam,” University of Miami law professor A. Michael Froomkin told Wired. That’s a bit harsh. Every exam needs one question so straightforward that the professor can autofail anyone who gets it wrong. That’s how you thin the pile!
There’s nothing serious about this law. It just feeds an appetite for anti-social media action conjured up by the politicians themselves. But unlike symbolic laws like State Tim Tebow Appreciation Day — every day in Florida for some reason — this is a law that’s only going to end up draining Florida’s coffers as its lawyers get routinely slapped around in court. Theoretically state prosecutors will attempt to enforce this law, or at least join the inevitable appeal of a private action under the law — and just throw more good money after bad on this. Because even government lawyer time is valuable — they may be sunk costs, but every minute pursuing a lost cause is a minute not going after something useful.
To be sure, the law will also cost tech companies money fighting back, which may be all Florida wants out of this blood pact, but it’s a curious brand of fiscal conservatism to commit to tossing taxpayer funds at a lost cause simply to bleed private enterprise.
But, hey, I used to think that state governments should be stopped for financial reasons from wasting state resources on facially unconstitutional abortion laws and now the Supreme Court’s going to overturn Roe next summer so maybe we’ll have compelled speech for tech companies by 2023.
And that will really mess up those future exam questions.
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.
COVID-19 has wreaked havoc across the world in every way possible. As an immigration lawyer, I see up close the incredible toll it’s taken on people and the hardships many have endured.
When COVID-19 lockdowns began in April 2020, many legal permanent residents, also known as green card holders, who had been traveling outside the U.S., got stuck wherever they were. Many unwillingly remained where they were for months, unable to return home for logistical, practical, and health reasons. And as the pandemic continues to rage, surging in certain parts of the world, this is still going on. We need a blanket policy that allows green card holders to return to the U.S. after an extended absence with no questions asked.
Green card holders are legally bound to reside in the U.S. for at least six months of the year. If they are gone for longer — between six and 12 months — there is a rebuttable presumption they’ve abandoned their green card status. And if they travel outside the country for more than 12 months, there is the presumption they have indeed abandoned it.
It’s not been unusual for this to occur over the last year. Clients who had been traveling before and in the early weeks of the pandemic couldn’t return as they intended for many reasons — either because flights were canceled or borders were closed. Some said they needed embassy permission to get on the waitlist to fly or that being high risk, just leaving the house, not to mention a 15-hour plane ride, could have been fatal. There were undoubtedly serious and legitimate reasons for people being unable to return home over the course of months, despite them wanting to do so.
Nonetheless, some green card holders arriving at airports or land borders following extended absences have faced intense interrogation regarding their intentions by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers (CBP). If CBP officers are convinced someone no longer intends to be a green card holder, the person will be presented with two options. In one, they’d be asked to sign Form I-407, in which they agree to surrender their green cards. In the other, they can be entered into deportation proceedings. Only an immigration judge can take one’s green card away, and the deportation route is intended to ensure that’s the case. You either give up status or go to court. That is why CBP will encourage a person sign the form, so it appears that a person has voluntarily surrendered the green card.
However, it is not as simple as just signing a form. Clients describe being held in a small room alone with five to eight CBP officers, each with a weapon. They describe an atmosphere that is both intimidating and scary. It is hard not to feel duress in that situation, and it’s no wonder some sign the form just to get out of there.
While there have been some reported cases in which people with 15 to 18 months of absences have been able to return home, there have been some new and disturbing trends. For example, some lawyers have recently reported that some airlines have refused people with such extended absences from boarding flights.
So, what is the solution? As more people get vaccinated, there will be more flexibility for people to travel overseas. But the pandemic is not over. And the Biden administration needs to immediately issue a blanket COVID-19 policy now for legal permanent residents. b Often people travel for six-month periods. And as the first worldwide lockdowns came in April 2020, November 2019 is a logical starting point.
Additionally, the policy memo should be sent to every CBP office in the country and to every airline, along with necessary training. Furthermore, training should include demonstrating compassion to such people. Many have lost loved ones while being stuck in unimaginable circumstances; it happened to one of my clients. In times of crisis, we need compassionate leadership. Now is the time to demonstrate it.
Tahmina Watson is the founding attorney of Watson Immigration Law in Seattle, where she practices US immigration law focusing on business immigration. She has been blogging about immigration law since 2008 and has written numerous articles in many publications. She is the author of Legal Heroes in the Trump Era: Be Inspired. Expand Your Impact. Change the World and The Startup Visa: Key to Job Growth and Economic Prosperity in America. She is also the founder of The Washington Immigrant Defense Network (WIDEN), which funds and facilitates legal representation in the immigration courtroom, and co-founder of Airport Lawyers, which provided critical services during the early travel bans. Tahmina is regularly quoted in the media and is the host of the podcast Tahmina Talks Immigration. She was recently honored by the Puget Sound Business Journal as one of the 2020 Women of Influence. You can reach her by email at tahmina@watsonimmigrationlaw.com or follow her on Twitter at @tahminawatson.
With the world finally re-opening and travel ramping back up, the weeks leading into June feel different than last year. You may even have a little bit more pep in your step as you begin to think about planting your feet in the sand at a well-deserved (and much-needed) beach getaway. As summer quickly approaches, it’s also an ideal time to reflect on the first half of the calendar year and make your plans for the second half. Whether you are considering a summer job search or thinking about ways to step out of the pandemic rut, here are four ways you can reimagine your summer motivation and make the best out of the second part of the calendar year.
Write Down Your Short-Term And Long-Term Goals
Many of my conversations these days revolve around what job seekers and professionals are planning for their careers post-COVID, both in the short-term and long-term. The past 15 months of the pandemic have taught us the power of resilience, adaptability, crisis management, social networking, and gratitude. Yet, the pandemic has also reaffirmed and reminded us about the stress of feeling cramped in makeshift work-from-home desk spaces, an inability to distinguish between work start/stop times, and an overabundance of Zoom calls that could have been emails.
Summer is a great time to think about what you want from your career in the short-term as well as what the next 5 to 10 years look like to you. If you have plans for relocation to a new city or state, now is a great time to begin thinking about the move. If you want to redesign your home office, summer is ideal for putting those plans into motion. Writing down your goals enables them to become more concrete, and you are more likely to act on them.
Create Accountability
I am a big proponent of looking inward and asking how you can improve yourself and be better than you were yesterday. I do a self-audit every six months as it allows me to see where I need to make changes and take massive action to get back on track if I have taken a slight detour. Begin thinking about how to cultivate motivation from within. Create accountability through a routine and schedule you can stick to. List steps you must take to make the progress you desire. Remember, it all starts with action — perhaps it’s a walk every night after dinner or a quick 20-minute ride on your Peloton bike. Let summer be the rebirth of your own internal energy.
Focus On Personal Growth
It’s easy to scroll through social media and look at someone’s “highlight reel” and feel sluggish, stagnant, or uninspired. Take a pause from social media and spend the summer focusing on your own personal growth. Have a desire to delve into move privacy work? Sign up for the CIPP/US certification. Want to learn about a new area of the law? Sign up for a few CLEs and make it a goal to speak with three attorneys who specialize in that practice area. Remember, progress happens when we step outside of our comfort zones.
Update Your Career Documents
As I mentioned in a prior article a few weeks ago, you should always have your resume, LinkedIn, and other career marketing collateral ready to go. Keep track of your accomplishments from the first six months of 2021. Update that deal sheet with recent transactions, add a few relevant new LinkedIn connections, and be sure to update your skills and endorsements section. Having things ready to go allows you to be prepared in case opportunity knocks.
There is no time like the present to look back and move forward in your goals for the second half of 2021.
Wendi Weiner is an attorney, career expert, and founder of The Writing Guru, an award-winning executive resume writing services company. Wendi creates powerful career and personal brands for attorneys, executives, and C-suite/Board leaders for their job search and digital footprint. She also writes for major publications about alternative careers for lawyers, personal branding, LinkedIn storytelling, career strategy, and the job search process. You can reach her by email at wendi@writingguru.net, connect with her on LinkedIn, and follow her on Twitter @thewritingguru.