Perfecting Your Elevator Pitch: Tips for Lawyers on the Rise
"What do you do?" This is a simple question, but it is one that is often misunderstood by young lawyers. There is an uncanny impulse to blurt out with pride, "I am a lawyer!" But what does that response really convey other than the fact that a person spent three years at law school and passed the bar exam?
February 05, 2020 at 01:03 PM
5 minute read
"What do you do?" This is a simple question, but it is one that is often misunderstood by young lawyers. There is an uncanny impulse to blurt out with pride, "I am a lawyer!" But what does that response really convey other than the fact that a person spent three years at law school and passed the bar exam?
In reality, when asked, "What do you do?", it is not an inquiry about your profession. It is important to understand the subtext of the question, "What tangible value can you produce for me?" or more simply, "What value can you create for me?" The truth is, being a lawyer by trade does not create value. A lawyer's value is generated and measured by how the lawyer solves problems for his clients.
As these conversations will happen at every event a young lawyer will attend, whether it be social or professional, it is important to have an answer in the toolkit; one must be able to convey his value in an easily digestible manner or construct; this is commonly called an elevator pitch.
The most important thing to keep in mind when constructing an elevator pitch is the understanding that it is a fluid process. As lawyers travel through their careers, the ways problems are solved and value inevitably changes. As a result, the elevator pitch constructed as a first-year associate will not be the same elevator pitch deployed as a second- or third-year associate.
An effective elevator pitch should generally consider a simple strategy.
|Audience
Who is this pitch meant for? Identifying a target audience is critical in clearly communicating value. Is the pitch meant to be heard by friends and family over holiday dinner, or is it something that will be delivered during a networking event with lawyers and other professionals? The former likely requires a less formal framing, while the latter assumes a higher level of sophistication and industry knowledge. Below are two examples of defense-side employment lawyer pitches that express the same value, yet do so using very different language.
- I work with companies to make sure they follow the law in handling employee-related issues like hiring, firing and overtime pay.
- My practice focuses on partnering with both private and public entities in ensuring consistent compliance under Title VII with respect to employment practices.
The first example, which is the less formal scenario, concisely states the client and provides concrete examples of the types of problems solved. This type of elevator pitch lends itself to an audience who may not be familiar with the kinds of issues employment lawyers routinely face and the types of clients requiring this service. The second example is more detailed, as it more fully addresses the scope of clients served and provides a specific type of reoccurring problem that the lawyer solves.
|Framing Value
In some circumstances, you may be aware of something in the news, recent legislation or otherwise that has the potential to directly affect a specific grouping of people. For example, newly adopted legislation may require an employer to add new information to employee pay stubs. In this situation, it would be beneficial to tweak the elevator pitch to address this change and reflect value accordingly as demonstrated in the example below.
- My practice, in part, focuses on partnering with employers to ensure contemporaneous compliance with newly passed regulations like the updated Pennsylvania wage statement law.
This pitch, while providing value generally, goes one step further and directly engages the individual by moving their potential problem, whether that problem is known or not to the client, and the solution to center stage. A young lawyer should utilize a pitch like this for networking events that cater to a single industry where the participants share a common problem.
|Practice
Once the basic formula of the elevator pitch is constructed, the only way to perfect delivery is to rehearse it out loud. A young lawyer must become comfortable talking about their value with the same familiarity as when talking about the weather. A best practice to ensure that an elevator pitch translates is to rehearse the pitch in a mirror, even if it can be a bit of an awkward exercise. It allows total awareness, including hearing how the pitch sounds off paper and taking note of body language. Questions to ask while practicing include:
- Pace: Am I speaking too quickly?
- Clarity: Am I enunciating each word?
- Body language: Are my hands at my side?
After an honest self-critique and repetition, the delivery should feel natural and therefore will impart confidence in the listener, as the value from the pitch has translated. Finally, before taking the pitch out on the road, rehearse it live with senior attorneys and partners who will give honest feedback. Choose colleagues in the same or similar practice group who are familiar with the work and expertise you are trying to gain, and who know your personal strengths.
Constructing, altering, perfecting and rehearsing an elevator pitch is one of the most important tasks a young lawyer undertakes so they are able to quantify their value early on in their career. If the steps are taken early and correctly, a young lawyer will never need to only respond, "I am a lawyer!" when asked the inevitable question, "What do you do?"
Zachary M. Kimmel is an associate with the labor and employment practice group in Clark Hill's Philadelphia office. He partners with both private and public sector employers in handling disputes, ensuring statutory compliance and consulting with clients on best practices in the workplace.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllIncoming Phila. Bar Chancellor Plans to Equip Members for Changing Tech Landscape
3 minute readHigh Verdicts and Venue Rule Land Pa. Courts on Top of 'Judicial Hellhole' List
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Final Misconduct Hearing Date Impending for Fulton Judge
- 2Senate Panel Postpones Vote on Reconfirmation of Democrat Crenshaw to SEC
- 3How Uncertainty in College Athletics Compensation Could Drive Lawsuits in 2025
- 4Insurers Dodge Sherwin-Williams' Claim for $102M Lead Paint Abatement Payment, State High Court Rules
- 5Supply Chain Challenges and Opportunities Under the Second Trump Administration
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250