MTal wrote:In other words, you're worth only what you bring in.
MTal wrote:Ideally that would be the case, but in the real world it isn't. You could be a brilliant aspy type lawyer and have all the relevant statutes and and rules memorized with the ability to recall them at a moments notice. Howevever, if you can't convince potential to clients to bring in business and then manage those relationships well once they do come in, all that knowledge you have isn't worth anything. Clients will choose to go with the dumber lawyer who is confident and outgoing than a brilliant aspy type lawyer who doesn't inspire confidence in himself with others.
You're trying to pull a slick one here, and I don't like it one bit. Yes, ability to bring in clients matters. Charisma matters. Communication skills matter.
But legal ability matters too. You're setting up this silly dichotomy between the "brilliant aspy type" lawyer and the "dumber lawyer who is confident".
What about the pretty smart lawyer who also is reasonably sociable?
Your first post is disingenuous in the extreme. You are unequivocally not
only what you bring in. You are also what you retain. And a huge part of retention is (gasp!
) ability as an attorney. Now, you may try to argue around this by saying that that is what you meant, and then fold all ability into the one package that then depends on confidence and outgoing-nature in order to sell. And of course that's true to some extent. But ability to sell yourself is not a sufficient condition to be a good lawyer. You have to be able to sell yourself reasonably well, but legal ability and the ability to work hard is also a huge component.
Last thought: why are you implicitly denigrating the sales part of law? Do you, perchance, consider yourself a "brilliant aspy type"? That would clear a lot of things up.