Hello again everyone!  As I have done for the past several years, I want to share a list of issues I believe in-house lawyers should pay attention to over the coming 12 months.  I started doing this when I first became a general counsel way back when Julius Caesar took 23 stabs to the body (he should have read my blog about the Ides of March).  Even though I am no longer practicing in-house, the process of trying to spot key issues is something I do every year, including in my role as CEO here at Hilgers Graben.  Simply put, then as now, I like to spend time thinking about developments, trends, and issues that may have a material impact on legal departments/businesses over the course of the new year.  I realize this is not something they teach you in law school (or anywhere really), so I will start by setting out the steps I followed to create my list as general counsel (and you are welcome to laugh at it, use it “as is,” or modify it to suit your own purposes):

  • I started by just gathering information.  I would catch up with other in-house lawyers and outside counsel, read newspapers, blogs, industry reports, attend conferences, sit in on business meetings, ask business leaders at the company, ask my team what they were seeing, and just generally pay attention to what was going on around me.  Information is gold and, like Scrooge McDuck, I was (and am) pretty greedy about it.
  • Once I spotted an issue that intrigued me, I looked at it from multiple angles and asked this question: How might this affect the company and the legal department?  Answering this meant I had to understand the company’s goals and strategy so I could spot and manage risks and I had to think strategically (not just legally).
  • From there, I made a list of the most important issues I spotted and worked them into the goals and activities of the legal department for the upcoming year.  To assist me, I created multiple checklists to help quickly analyze the potential risks and strategic implications of the items on my list.  Here is a shortened version of one checklist.  It’s a helpful filter when you look at things coming across your desk day in and day out:
    • Is this something that can create or destroy value for the company?
    • How does this fit into my company’s strategic goals?
    • What is the quantitative/qualitative impact of this?
    • Could this be a game-changer and how so?
    • Is this something a regulator might care about or lead to litigation?
    • Who is impacted by this – company, competitors, vendors, customers – and how so?
    • What happens if I apply game theory to this?
    • Who needs to know about this in the department/company?
    • How can we create a competitive advantage from this?
    • Have others had problems or success with this before and what are the lessons already learned?

The answers to these questions tell you a lot about the issue you are analyzing and whether it “matters” or not.  You do not need a checklist, but it’s a useful tool that can help you quickly sort through a lot of information.  You can also use an Eisenhower Matrix (2×2) to plot issues.  Here is one option for such a matrix (though what you put on the X-axis and Y-axis is wide open): 

It’s a little clunky for sure, but it just depends on what you find most useful.  Regardless of what you use to help you think through the issues, it’s really all about finding a consistent framework and repeatable process.  Okay, enough of the background story – let’s get going!  This edition of “Ten Things” sets out my list of critical issues in-house lawyers should pay attention to and plan against for 2025:

1.  Trump 2.0.  Love or hate him, in just a very short window, President Trump has brought chaos and unpredictability to the political environment here in the USA and around the globe.  To date, most everything has been done by an avalanche of “executive orders” (vs. legislation) or prosecutorial discretion, including enforcement priorities, antitrust, FCPA, tax reforms, DEI, crypto, immigration policy, military policy, trade regulations, foreign aid, renaming the Gulf of Mexico, etc.  Since this is the first time anything like this (i.e., governing through executive orders) has been tried at scale, there are a lot of unknowns about the legality of many of the orders. Courts could reverse much of what has happened to date (assuming President Trump doesn’t bring forth a Constitutional crisis by ignoring court rulings – and that is definitely something to watch out for).  Assuming it all passes court scrutiny, because they are executive orders, they can be easily reversed and discarded in January 2028 by the next President (or if who controls the House and Senate changes in 2026).  So, buckle up – this is going to get (more) batshit crazy really fast, which is the last thing in-house lawyers want to hear.   

Equally interesting is the President’s engagement of Elon Musk to take a chainsaw to government agencies.  There will certainly be multiple legal challenges to come there as well.  And how will Americans act when they are impacted and “their” favorite program is hit?  I suspect very badly, which will be a problem for the administration if so.  The unpredictability of the executive orders, the DOGE boys’ targets, acting on impulse, coupled with the inevitable legal challenges and potential tidal wave of citizen dissatisfaction, is pointing to an environment of incredible uncertainty for corporate decision-making and strategic planning here in 2025.[1]  The good news here is that there is no group better suited to sift through the uncertainty and confusion than the legal department. Here is what I would be doing to prepare for the above:

  • Policy monitoring: Establish a team to monitor executive orders and policy changes, assessing their potential impact on the organization. To some extent, this means letting the dust settle before making any decisive moves (if that is an option).  For example, I would not set my sales team free to bribe the shit out of foreign officials thinking there is now a free pass under the “paused” FCPA.
  • Compliance audits: Conduct regular audits of company policies, particularly in areas like DEI and immigration, to ensure alignment with current regulations and executive directives (whatever those may be) or, like many companies, take DEI initiatives private and stay out of the spotlight while still managing DEI goals (most likely under a different name).
  • Scenario planning: Develop plans for various policy outcomes, for example, those concerning trade tariffs or tax reforms (or worse, e.g., your company making the ever-growing Trump Administration “enemies list” and dealing with the fallout).
  • Stakeholder communication: Maintain lines of communication with stakeholders, including the board of directors, employees, local and national politicians, customers, vendors, etc., to navigate the implications of policy changes collaboratively.
  • Legal challenges: Be prepared to engage in or respond to legal challenges arising from executive orders that may affect the company’s interests (or take advantage of those that help).

2.  Agentic AI.  Agentic Artificial Intelligence (“AAI”) is AI capable of autonomous decision-making, interacting with you and with tools on your behalf, like an agent or administrative assistant.  We are seeing AAI increasingly integrated into business operations at an exponential rate as it offers great efficiency and innovation.  Here are just a few examples:

  • Automated executive assistants: AAI that can schedule meetings, draft emails, summarize meetings, and even anticipate executive needs based on previous decisions.
  • Financial analysts: AAI tools that can autonomously analyze revenue trends, predict cash flow risks, and adjust financial forecasts in real-time.
  • Procurement negotiators: Tools that can autonomously negotiate supplier contracts, find cost-effective deals, and adjust procurement strategies based on market fluctuations.

It does not take an I.Q. of 195[2] to realize the power (and danger) of AAI (vs. Generative AI) and how it differs from the same:


While there is a lot to get excited about when it comes to AAI (and I can think of dozens of uses), it presents some complex legal and ethical challenges for in-house lawyers to mull over, including (i) liability for AI-driven decisions, (ii) intellectual property rights, (iii) data privacy concerns, (iv) potential algorithmic biases, and (v) algorithmic “price fixing” or other potential antitrust violations (where various AAI agents conspire with each other – much like humans would do).  The autonomous nature of AAI raises questions about accountability, especially when these systems operate without direct human oversight.  My concerns for 2025 boil down to this:  who is responsible when AAI screws up?  Most likely, it will be the company using the AAI, which means in-house lawyers need to be ready.  Here are some thoughts on how to prepare:

  • AI governance frameworks: Develop and implement comprehensive AI governance policies for the company and the legal department that address ethical considerations, compliance requirements, and risk management.
  • Cross-functional collaboration: Work closely with IT, HR, data science, and compliance teams (among others) to understand all AI system functionalities and ensure they align with legal and ethical standards (internal and external).
  • Regulatory compliance: Stay informed about evolving AI regulations and standards, both domestically and internationally, to proactively adjust company practices.
  • Transparency: Ensure the company’s AI systems have “explainable” decision-making processes, enabling helpful and clear communication with stakeholders and regulatory bodies should the tools come under scrutiny.
  • Liability assessments (and mitigation): Regularly evaluate potential liabilities associated with AI applications and adjust insurance and AI risk management strategies accordingly.

3.  Rising cost of legal services  At this point in my legal career, I can say with 100% confidence that there are three things you cannot avoid: death, taxes, and annual fee increases from law firms (especially “Big Law”).  Somehow, the business of law defies all of the rules of basic economics, e.g., price increases have not slowed demand.[3]  And even as law schools crank out more and more lawyers, like hamsters birthing more hamsters every 16 to 30 days, the rules of supply and demand have no apparent place in this bizarro universe.  My philosophic musings on the ever-increasing billable hour rate usually come down to this: “How is this even f*&^ing possible?!”  Granted, I’m no Socrates but I have a feeling that he would be shitting in his toga and guzzling hemlock tea by the bucket if he received an invoice for legal services where partners are billing $3,000 an hour and third-year associates are closing in on $1,000.  As I see it, the escalating costs of legal services, particularly from large law firms, are straining corporate legal budgets to the breaking point, and 2025 may be the year the reckoning comes (or at least starts in earnest).  To me, the type and number of legal matters that can justify these astounding rates must be a shrinking puddle as in-house legal teams face ever-increasing pressure to manage expenses (CFO) while maintaining high-quality legal support (CEO/board of directors). Dealing with these vicious cross-pressures requires a complete reassessment of how in-house lawyers engage with law firms.

The answer, I think, is pretty obvious: In-house counsel must further diversify their pool of outside counsel to include significantly more mid-sized or boutique firms that offer substantially lower rates without compromising expertise. More alternative fee arrangements (e.g., flat fees) should be on the table.  And litigation financing must be at the top of the checklist if you are suing someone.  Likewise, leveraging technology (e.g., AAI) and bringing more work in-house will become critical goals for most legal departments this year and in the future.  My advice is as follows:

  • Alternative fee arrangements: Negotiate AFAs such as fixed fees, retainers, or success-based fees to help achieve cost predictability and align incentives with your outside counsel.
  • Panel reviews: Create and/or regularly assess and update panels of preferred law firms through an RFP process, considering factors like cost efficiency and service quality (vs. name brands).
  • In-house expertise: Invest in training and development to enhance the capabilities of the internal legal team, enabling them to handle more complex matters independently.
  • Technology: Adopt more legal technology solutions, such as contract management systems and AI tools, to streamline processes and reduce reliance on external counsel (but see discussion below on value vs. hype).
  • Legal procurement: Consider turning negotiation with (but not the selection of) law firms over to professional procurement specialists.

4.  Return-to-Office mandates.  Doesn’t it feel like decades since COVID-19 hit and everyone was wearing a mask and working at home?  It wasn’t that long ago, now that I think about it.  And two years ago, didn’t it seem like working remotely would become the new normal? It’s now clear that many businesses (and the federal government) are expecting workers to return to the office, either full-time or some type of hybrid model (or leave).  This is not welcomed news for many employees, and how this plays out over 2025 is something to keep an eye on, especially when it comes to your own company.  Specifically, as organizations implement return-to-office (RTO) mandates, in-house counsel must navigate the intersection of legal compliance and corporate culture. RTO mandates raise issues related to employment law, health and safety regulations, and employee relations (think unhappy villagers with torches and pitchforks). Balancing operational needs with employee expectations for flexibility is a tough task that requires thoughtful legal and strategic planning.

Legal issues include ensuring that RTO policies comply with labor laws, providing reasonable accommodations, and addressing potential discrimination claims. Culturally, organizations must manage employee morale and retention, as overly rigid RTO policies may lead to regrettable attrition or just a grumpy and unproductive workforce. Here are some things to consider:

  • Policy reviews: Ensure that RTO mandates comply with labor laws, including disability accommodations and state-specific remote work regulations.
  • Flexible frameworks: Propose (or support) policies that balance company needs with employee preferences, such as hybrid models – which are far less likely to lead to wholesale problems (or mass quitting).
  • Manager training: Train managers on how to handle accommodation requests and avoid legal pitfalls when enforcing RTO policies.
  • Employee communication: Work with HR to craft communications that explain the rationale behind RTO policies.
  • Risk mitigation: Monitor and address potential legal claims related to RTO, such as discrimination or wrongful termination claims.

5.  The “Great Retirement.”  While this issue first arose several years ago, in-house lawyers are on the verge of witnessing a significant generational shift as many Baby Boomer general counsel rapidly approach retirement age. This “silver tsunami” is a looming wave of retirements that will create challenges and opportunities for in-house legal teams. The departure of a seasoned general counsel (or other senior legal department leader) means a potential loss of institutional knowledge, strategic insight, and deep-rooted relationships with key stakeholders. However, it opens doors for the next generation of leaders within legal departments to step up and take the reins.  In-house legal departments must proactively plan for this transition because it is here. Succession planning should be a priority, not an afterthought. Legal departments, working with HR and the C-Suite,[4] must identify high-potential lawyers within the organization and provide them with leadership development opportunities, including mentorship programs, cross-functional projects, and exposure to C-Suite and board-level meetings and decision-making.  Anything less is a dereliction of duty, punishable by having to read the millions of emails Elon Musk will be getting back to his DOGE@gmail.com address from federal employees setting out the five things they worked on last week. (Just kidding.  No one will read them…).[5] Regardless, establishing a structured knowledge transfer process is critical to ensure continuity when senior legal department leaders retire, e.g., documentation of key legal strategies, risk management frameworks, and external counsel relationships.  And the time to start is now.  Here are some preparation strategies to consider:

  • Succession planning: Identify high-potential talent within the legal department and create development plans for leadership roles.  Create retention plans for the same.
  • Knowledge transfer: Implement structured knowledge-sharing programs between retiring leaders and their successors.
  • Mentorship program: Encourage senior lawyers to mentor junior team members to help ensure a smooth transition.
  • Future-proofing: Assess whether the incoming general counsel (or senior leaders) should bring new skills to the table to align with evolving business needs.

6.  Health and Wellness.  It’s tough being a lawyer, and being an in-house lawyer is no exception.  The stress, long hours, and bad health habits permeate most in-house legal departments, just like they do at law firms. From where I sit, the mental health crisis in the legal profession continues to escalate, with in-house lawyers facing mounting pressures that often lead to burnout.  I have a chapter on this in my new book, “The Productive In-House Lawyer,” as high workloads, constant crisis management, and blurred work-life boundaries are all severely impacting in-house lawyer well-being, team morale, and – most importantly – overall productivity. The health and well-being of the in-house team (and themselves) should be an operational priority for department leaders.

To start, general counsel must lead by example. Setting boundaries around work hours, encouraging the use of paid time off, and fostering a culture where it’s acceptable to discuss mental health are key steps. Legal departments should take advantage of any company-provided wellness programs (including access to mental health resources, stress management workshops, time management classes, and flexible working arrangements where possible).  Regular check-ins focused on well-being—not just work project updates—can help managers identify signs of burnout early. Moreover, legal departments should evaluate workloads and staffing to ensure no one is perpetually overburdened (huddle meetings are a great way to do this). Healthy, engaged lawyers are more productive, creative, and better positioned to support the business – a top goal for 2025 (or any year).  Here are the things I would focus on:

  • Wellness programs: Implement wellness initiatives, including mental health resources, flexible schedules, and stress management workshops.
  • Workload assessments: Regularly review workloads to ensure that lawyers aren’t overburdened and adjust staffing as needed.
  • Work-life balance: Encourage team members to use time off, set boundaries, and avoid after-hours work when possible.
  • Leadership training: Train managers to recognize signs of burnout and provide support to team members.
  • Speak up: Foster a culture where team members feel comfortable discussing mental health challenges without fear of stigma.

7.  Grievance politics in the office. Over the last few years, the workplace has become a gladiatorial arena where social and political tensions frequently surface.[6] From debates over corporate stances on social issues to disagreements among employees about diversity initiatives or political events, “grievance politics” is a growing concern for in-house counsel. These (often intense) internal conflicts can lead to legal disputes, harm company culture, and damage the organization’s reputation if not limited and/or managed effectively.  In-house lawyers, working with HR and company leaders, are well suited to help navigate this challenging topic by developing clear policies that address employee conduct, free speech, and the appropriate use of company platforms (including social media). While it’s important to respect diverse viewpoints, organizations must also maintain standards that prevent harassment, discrimination, and hostile work environments (regardless of whether you are on the right or left of a topic). Training managers to handle sensitive conversations and de-escalate conflicts is essential. Similarly, the legal department should be involved in shaping the company’s response to social and political issues, balancing the desire to “take a stand” with the need to mitigate potential backlash from employees, customers, or regulators.[7]  As you look ahead to 2025, consider the following:

  • Clear conduct policies: Draft policies outlining acceptable workplace behavior, both in-person and on social media.  Check out this outstanding article by the Littler firm on the topic:  Politics in the Workplace: What Employers Need to Know.
  • Training programs: Train managers and employees on handling sensitive conversations and de-escalating conflicts.
  • Neutral corporate messaging: Work with corporate communications and HR teams to ensure that company statements on social issues are balanced and aligned with corporate values.
  • Dispute resolution: Implement internal grievance procedures that allow employees to voice concerns without escalating to legal disputes.
  • Legal preparedness: Be ready for potential legal claims related to discrimination, harassment, or retaliation stemming from political or social disagreements.  Have experienced employment law counsel lined up in advance, as issues relating to grievance politics can escalate quickly.[8]

8.  Legal tech hype vs. value.  The explosion of legal technology has created a crowded marketplace for in-house legal departments to shop, one filled with tools promising to streamline operations, reduce costs, and boost productivity.  From contract lifecycle management (CLM) systems to AI-driven drafting platforms, the options are seemingly endless. Distinguishing between truly transformative solutions and overhyped “snake-oil” products remains a significant challenge for in-house counsel.  To make strategic legal tech investments, general counsel should begin by doing the following: (i) asking whether the legal team is fully utilizing the technology it already has in place.  If not, don’t buy anything new until you have wrung every ounce of value out of what you are already paying for.  By this, I mean email, word processing, spreadsheets, legal research, matter management, document management, contract management, e-billing systems, and collaboration tools (i.e., Slack, Teams, etc.) in addition to anything else you may have in place.[9]  Until you master what’s already in place, buying anything new is foolish,[10] and (ii) after getting the full value of what you already have in place, start looking at what else is needed, i.e., what are the legal department’s pain points and how do those pain points line up in terms of the priorities of the business? For example, does the business want you to reduce contract turnaround time, improve compliance tracking, or better manage litigation? Identifying what is needed (on the legal side and the business side) helps ensure that legal department technology investments align with business goals (which also makes it easier to get funding).

Once new tools are identified, involving end-users (user acceptance testing) in the evaluation process is critical.  A system that looks great on paper but is difficult to use will sit idle, like a permanent monument to your bad decision to buy it in the first place. Consider pilot programs to test new tools before a full rollout, allowing the legal team to provide feedback and flag potential issues early in the process.  Here are the basics for finding value over hype:

  • Needs assessment: Conduct a thorough analysis to identify the specific pain points that legal tech should address.
  • Pilot program: Test new tools in small-scale pilot programs before rolling them out department-wide.
  • Cross-functional input: Involve end-users in the evaluation process to ensure the selected tools align with workflows.
  • Vendor accountability: Include training, clear SLAs, and performance metrics in contracts with legal tech vendors.
  • ROI tracking: Establish KPIs to measure the effectiveness of new tools, focusing on metrics like time savings, cost reduction, and risk mitigation.

9.  Activist attorney generals.  State attorneys general have become increasingly active (some would say “weaponized”) in pursuing enforcement actions driven by political agendas, with both the left and the right targeting businesses in industries ranging from technology and healthcare to energy and finance.  In 2025, virtually all companies face heightened legal risks from state attorney general investigations that may be motivated as much (or more) by political considerations as by legal merit.  In-house counsel must stay vigilant, monitoring state AG activities in the jurisdictions where the business operates and be ready to respond if something comes the company’s way. Building relationships with external counsel who specialize in such investigations can provide you with insights and strategic guidance if the company becomes a target.[11]

Politics aside, it is also smart to conduct regular risk assessments, particularly in areas frequently scrutinized by activist AGs, such as consumer protection, data privacy, environmental compliance, and labor practices. Ensuring that internal compliance programs are robust and up to date can help mitigate the risk of enforcement actions.  Lastly, when faced with a state attorney general inquiry or lawsuit, legal teams must carefully weigh the risks of litigation versus settlement. While fighting a politically motivated case on principle may be tempting, the reputational risks, time distraction, and financial costs should also be considered. Like many disputes, early settlement may be the most prudent course of action regardless of the merits.[12]  For 2025, focus on:

  • Risk assessments: Regularly evaluate the company’s exposure to state attorney general investigations, focusing on areas like consumer protection, antitrust, and data privacy.
  • External counsel: Identify law firms experienced with state AG investigations (one on the right and one on the left).
  • Compliance reviews: Conduct periodic compliance audits to ensure the company is not inadvertently violating state laws.
  • Crisis management planning: Prepare for investigations by developing a crisis management plan, including communication strategies (which are often the most important first step).
  • Monitoring: Stay on top of state AG activity in relevant states and industries to anticipate potential enforcement actions (your external counsel should be able to keep you updated on what’s going on out there that you need to worry about).

10. The importance of feedback.  My last essential issue for 2025 is feedback. Feedback is the lifeblood of personal and professional growth, yet it is often overlooked in busy legal departments (or avoided because no one wants to be the “bad guy” and tell someone that there is room for improvement). Without regular, constructive feedback, in-house lawyers (and the legal department itself) will struggle to improve, miss development opportunities, and, ultimately, feel disconnected from the company’s goals and strategy.

For the general counsel and department leaders, a culture of smart feedback starts with leading by example. Regularly providing thoughtful, specific feedback to team members helps them understand what they’re doing well and where they can improve. This often occurs in regular weekly meetings, i.e., don’t use these meetings for just a discussion of what’s going on; they also provide a place for immediate feedback.  Feedback, however, should be a two-way street. General counsel and other legal department leaders should actively solicit feedback from their teams, peers, and business stakeholders to understand how they can better support their employees and the company as a whole.

Training managers on how to give and receive feedback effectively is also essential. Good feedback looks like this: specific, actionable, and framed in a way that encourages learning and growth (rather than defensiveness and point-by-point rebuttal – which most lawyers will automatically default to when criticized, even constructively). Feedback also includes recognizing and celebrating successes, i.e., it’s not just about things someone did “wrong.”  If you are ready to upgrade the legal department’s feedback game in 2025, focus on:

  • Structure: Implement a review process and regular check-ins that contain “giving constructive feedback” as an essential part of the process.
  • Training: Train yourself and managers on giving constructive, specific feedback in real-time that helps others grow (and remember to praise as much as you correct).
  • 360-degree reviews: Use multi-source feedback to provide the team with diverse perspectives, especially from the business.
  • Peer feedback: Encourage legal department members to provide feedback to one another to build a culture of continuous improvement.
  • Feedback on leadership: The general counsel/senior leaders should also seek feedback from their teams to improve their own management styles.[13]

*****

Okay, so there you go.  If you have waded through all 5,000 words here (and the footnotes and hyperlinks), congratulations,  you have earned a snack!  Seriously, I know all of this a lot to chew on.  So, pick and choose a handful of things you want to focus on in 2025.  And you will likely have things on your list that I do not discuss above, and if so, go with those.  But hopefully, I have given you some good ideas or at least a framework to uncover your own essential issues for the coming year.  If so, let me know what issues you think are important this year (especially by responding to this post on LinkedIn).  Otherwise, keep reading, stay vigilant, and have a great 2025!

Sterling Miller

March 3, 2025

My latest book (number six), The Productive In-House Lawyer: Tips, Hacks, and the Art of Getting Things Done, is now available for sale.  Like the ABA says, “It is essential that every citizen of earth buy at least two copies of this book – they are taking up way too much space in the warehouse!”  You can buy your two copies here: Buy The Book!

My fifth book, Showing the Value of the Legal Department: More Than Just a Cost Center is available now, including as an eBook!  You can buy a copy HERE.

Two of my books, Ten Things You Need to Know as In-House Counsel – Practical Advice and Successful Strategies and Ten (More) Things You Need to Know as In-House Counsel – Practical Advice and Successful Strategies Volume 2, are on sale now at the ABA website (including as e-books). 

I have published two other books: The Evolution of Professional Football, and The Slow-Cooker Savant (and cookbook number two on the schedule for 2025!).  I am also available for speaking engagements, webinars/CLEs, coaching, training, and consulting.

Connect with me on Twitter @10ThingsLegal and on LinkedIn where I post articles and stories of interest to in-house counsel frequently.  

“Ten Things” is not legal advice nor legal opinion and represents my views only.  It is intended to provide practical tips and references to the busy in-house practitioner and other readers.  If you have questions or comments, or ideas for a post, please contact me at sterling.miller@sbcglobal.net, or if you would like a CLE for your in-house legal team on this or any topic in the blog, contact me at smiller@hilgersgraben.com.

[1] That was an awesome sentence, but please hold your applause until the end of the blog.  Thank you – The Management.

[2] Which is good because many claim my I.Q. barely tops room temperature on most days.

[3] See, I was paying attention in Econ 101 (even if my eyes were closed).

[4] Yes, get the input of the C-Suite on who the “best” lawyers are.  Your list and their list may vary, and you want to find that out now vs. when someone leaves and suddenly your chosen candidate gets crickets (or worse) when you propose their name.

[5] Must…resist…urge…to… make…smartass…joke…here…

[6] And no, I am not entertained.

[7] See the discussion on “enemies list” above.

[8] For a state-by-state guide, see https://www.sixfifty.com/resource-library/politics-in-the-workplace-state-by-state-guide/

[9] I recommend a series of lunch and learns for the legal team to focus on each piece of technology the legal department is using.

[10] Like most things, nothing is in stone.  For example, I highly recommend playing around with Generative AI (free version or paid versions) to see if you can find use cases that add immediate value in terms of time savings and productivity.

[11] Lots of law firms claim this specialty practice.  My advice is to reach out to your network and ask, “Who’s good” for this type of matter.  Those recommendations will be far more helpful than a “Chambers” ranking.

[12] I know this sounds incredibly cynical and chickenshit.  And it is.  But I am taking out the emotion and just “doing the math” on what is best for the company, its employees, and its shareholders because, as general counsel, that is a key part of the job (unless I am general counsel for a not-for-profit).

[13] I’d like to thank the Harvard Business Review for all of their great articles on giving and getting feedback.  You can sign-up for free and read a certain number of articles each month at no cost.  That’s a hell of a deal!