Winning Isn’t Everything in Developing Your In-House Career

As a lawyer, I like to win. Most lawyers do. And that’s a good thing, because we are hired to zealously advocate for our clients’ interests.

But there is such a thing as focusing too much on winning for the sake of the win rather than for the good of the business—or the actual goal. It is possible to get lost in the weeds when our efforts would be better spent elsewhere.

In-house lawyers aren’t just there to negotiate the most aggressively favorable contract possible or to squeeze every possible benefit to our company out of a partnership agreement. Instead, we deliver the most value by using our legal skills and knowledge, coupled with our deep understanding of the business, to drive toward strategic goals. And with finite time and energy, not every win is equally valuable.

Empty Wins

I experienced this phenomenon early in my in-house career when I aggressively negotiated a low-risk vendor contract and felt accomplished for having “won” nearly every point. The end result from a contractual perspective was an agreement that very much favored my company.

But if I’d taken the time to ask about goals before starting the negotiation, I would have—and should have—negotiated differently.

If the only goal had been to make sure we were contractually in a position of power, I would have done a fantastic job. But it turned out that the business team for whom I was negotiating didn’t actually care about most of the points I’d negotiated. The strictly legal provisions I’d negotiated weren’t likely to matter much, either.

To make matters worse, there were business reasons why we needed to onboard with the vendor quickly, and negotiations had slowed the process by a week. If I hadn’t pushed for the unnecessary wins, we could have been up and running sooner, with a perfectly workable if slightly less favorable contract.

Business-Minded Approach

In the years since that overly zealous negotiation, I’ve adopted a business-minded approach to in-house lawyering. With such an approach, an in-house lawyer or legal department aims to meaningfully drive the business toward its strategic goals while appropriately mitigating risk—not to eliminate all risk by winning every point.

While I still seek the best possible outcome every time, I am clearer on what that outcome should look like. I approach projects and negotiations with more curiosity and less competitiveness.

Business-minded lawyers start by digging into big-picture business goals—maybe for the year or for the quarter—long before any project or negotiation. Nearly every company wants to sell its product or service. But beyond that, specifics matter.

Is the company prioritizing revenue growth or profitability? Is it trying to become more innovative as an older company, or does it want to break into a market as a new player on the scene? Is the company looking to be acquired or IPO in the short or medium term?

Understanding the big-picture goals and context impacts everything from how the legal team structures its workflows, to who does what work, to what work gets prioritized (and what gets put on the backburner). A strategic legal department leader knows that aligning resources against the big-picture goal, to set up for specific project and negotiation support, is key to driving that impact.

But business-minded in-house lawyers don’t stop there. Their next step is taking the time to understand how specific projects relate to and support the company’s goals.

For example, a particular partnership agreement may be especially valuable if it’s with an established brand in the space that the company is trying to break into. Conversely, a high-revenue contract may matter less than face value would suggest if execution costs are high and profitability is the goal.

Understanding the relationships between priorities and projects helps lawyers understand how to spend their time and energy—and how to make specific choices in connection with each project.
Project-specific context matters, too. This includes questions such as those in the earlier example about the importance of timing.

It also includes whether there’s a current or future relationship with the counterparty, how the deal fits into broader projects or dependencies, and what’s already been agreed to, either explicitly or implicitly. Understanding these dynamics helps a business-minded in-house lawyer prioritize work, avoid rework, and drive better outcomes.

Finally, business-minded lawyers proactively work to moving the business forward rather than reacting to issues only when they land on their desk or trying to win narrow legal points.

This means actively looking for ways legal can support strategic goals and add value, even when there’s no obvious legal victory attached. For example, it might mean flagging regulatory hurdles early in a product launch process, identifying new opportunities arising out of changing legislation, or creating a playbook to streamline repetitive negotiations.

Making an Impact

At its best, in-house lawyering isn’t about racking wins for the sake of winning; it’s about making an impact. That means stepping back from the urge to score points with every argument and instead asking what will most help the business succeed.

It requires judgment, curiosity, and a willingness to measure success by business results and not just by legal outcomes. And while the shift to business-minded lawyering can take time, it’s ultimately what sets great in-house lawyers apart.

This article does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg Industry Group, Inc., the publisher of Bloomberg Law, Bloomberg Tax, and Bloomberg Government, or its owners.

Author Information

Heather Stevenson is general counsel at Red Cell Partners. Earlier in her career, she left Big Law to found a juice bar before returning to practice as an in-house lawyer.

Write for Us: Author Guidelines