Does “First Who, Then What” Work for Law Firm Leadership?

Jim Collins’ book, Good to Great is one of my favorites, and one I think everyone should read. There’s been an interesting ongoing discussion about how Collins’ bus metaphor (first get the right people on the bus, then determine where the bus is going) applies to professional services firms – Patrick Lamb posts about how hard it is to go from good to great here. He says that just because it’s difficult for professional firms to do, doesn’t mean that Collins’ theories don’t apply to professional services firms the same way they apply to businesses. His post discusses posts from Michelle Golden of Golden Practices (The Good to Great Bus Metaphor) and Phil Gott (Look At Your Firm As Though It Were A Bus).

Both Gott and Golden struggle with the Collins bus metaphor for professional services firms. As Gott says, most firms are not ‘centrally run’ – they’re often run by partners with conflicting views and conflicting interests and ideas about the direction of the firm. Gott concludes that firms need a clear and declared destination, and individual professionals need to know where they want to go.

Golden’s asks, “Can we at least agree that we need our long term strategy first (destination and routes) before we determine if we have the infrastructure (fleet and drivers) to get there? ” and suggests that this may be the key to resolving recruitment and retention problems.

Lamb points out that in Good to Great, Collins’ research revealed that leaders of the Good to Great companies started by first getting the right people on the bus, and only then determining where the bus was going. This was a surprise to Collins, who expected that leaders would first set the vision and then get people on board who could support the vision.

What both Gott and Golden seem to be saying is that they think that Collins’ original hypothesis is what works for professional services firms. I suspect that’s because it’s so common that professional services firms fail to set a vision or declared direction at all, so it appears that it’s that lack of direction that is the problem with professional services firms. But perhaps that’s not the root problem.

Lamb points out that when Collins talks about getting the right people on the bus before establishing the direction, he’s talking about the leaders of the business. He’s not talking about those that will do the day to day work. He’s talking about the people that will be making the big decisions – the key players. Lamb also points out that without research into professional services firms that have actually gone from good to great, it’s tough to say that the good to great principles don’t apply to professional services firms.

What we can’t forget is that Collins isn’t talking about every business, at every stage of the business’ growth – he’s talking specifically about a transition period in which a business was going from good to great. They were businesses that were already established and successful. The principles discussed in Good to Great are the principles that allowed some businesses to make a breakthrough to becoming truly great, as opposed to merely staying ‘good,’ or declining.

One of Collins’ main points in the “First Who…Then What” chapter is that the leaders of the good to great companies recognized that the world changes, and to be truly successful, adaptation is essential. Therefore, the declared direction isn’t the driving force, because the declared direction must change over time and adapt to the market. It’s the quality of the people that makes the difference. As Collins says,

…if you have the right people on the bus, the problem of how to motivate and manage people largely goes away. The right people don’t need to be tightly managed or fired up; they will be self-motivated by the inner drive to produce the best results and to be part of creating something great….if you have the wrong people, it doesn’t matter whether you discover the right direction; you still won’t have a great company. Great vision without great people is irrelevant.

Gott and Golden are right in that professional services firms are often lacking in overall direction and vision, and that partners are frequently in conflict about where to go and how to get there. Perhaps the problem arises from poor choice of partners(the right people) and whether some partners just aren’t the right ‘fit’ for the firm. If the partners don’t share character, values, work ethic and dedication, no direction can be be established, and attaining greatness will be impossible. (And many firms also give little thought to the roles individual partners should play within the firm – their seat on the bus – another concept that Collins indicates the Good to Great companies determined before determining direction).

I’m not suggesting that partnerships should be made up of people that all think exactly the same way, or have exactly the same views or interests. Different views are important. The problem with many professional services firms seems to be that there is no ultimate agreement on direction once the differing views have been taken into account. As Collins says, “You need executives, on the one hand, who argue and debate – sometimes violently – in pursuit of the best answers, yet, on the other hand, who unify fully behind a decision, regardless of parochial interests.”

This, to me, is what’s missing in a lot of professional services firms. Once the direction has been determined and the decision made, firm leadership needs to stand behind it, rather than continuing to advance their individual agendas, which are often in conflict with the firm’s direction. That’s precisely the reason why the right people need to come before the direction. Directions will change, but for a firm to last for the long term and sustain growth, it’s got to have the right people at the top to create the direction and stand behind it.