|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The silos keep coming down. Laura Richardson, general counsel at Agiloft, the leader in data-first contract life-cycle management technology, has spent the last six years of her legal career in-house, with stops at Intel and Osso VR. But at heart she’s an anthropologist, and through that lens she’s examined the shifting nature of the general counsel role through the years.
Richardson has watched as the general counsel role continues to expand and to more closely reflect the original charge of a lawyer: to help resolve conflicts and build relationships. Somewhere along the way, the legal function became more siloed. “The business” and “the lawyers” drew lines and stayed in their lanes, creating the illusion that going in-house was a step down for attorneys. Lawyers frequently believed their work wouldn’t be as valued in-house as in a firm and people considered you more of a cost center than a contributor.
“The idea seemed to be that if you couldn’t cut it at a law firm, you went in-house,” Richardson reflects. “But people have started to realize that’s simply not true, and the in-house path has become a more sought-after one precisely because those siloes have started to come down.”
The Agiloft GC says the traditionally more business-focused leaders and decision-makers have come to greatly value the judgment that legal professionals develop over time. At the same time, lawyers have learned to adapt their messaging for a business audience. They are unlocking synergies that blur the line between the law department and a trusted business advisor.
“As we see those silos coming down, legal leaders become more integrated into the business,” Richardson explains. “They’re being asked to take on more because legal leadership can handle a wider range [of issues], based upon the knowledge they have of the company, the relationships that matter to the company, and laws and regulations that will impact functions like compliance and HR.”
Richardson also wants to ease the minds of those battling imposter syndrome, whether they’ve just begun their legal journey or are years into their career. When she was presenting at conferences earlier in her career, the future lawyer had to write down exactly what she was saying on notecards, word for word. At Intel, she remembers bombing a presentation in front of VPs, GMs, and a variety of other leaders.
“I was awful, I was nervous, I was stumbling all over the place, and I was sweating,” Richardson says, laughing. “The reason I’m so open about this is because I want to dispel the notion that you either ‘have it’ or you don’t. It’s not true. I kept on failing, but I failed better every time. Then one day, I didn’t fail.”
“It was the same with negotiations,” she continues. “I used to go home and cry after every single one because of the sheer stress of it. But after reps and reps, it’s just a different world for me.”
But it’s not easy. Richardson spent a lot of years in law firms telling herself the story that she wasn’t cut out for law at all. Her success was a lie. She was fooling her mentors and, despite wanting to do her absolute best, she was never living up to her standards.
“In my first role, a wonderful mentor named Tom Hanrahan told me that the things I saw as weaknesses—my vulnerability, my ability to connect with people, and the heart I put into my work—were what made me great. I wish I would have learned to give myself more grace early in my career. Lawyers are naturally skeptical and perfectionists, and a lot of people in our field suffer for their work. They suffer and they shouldn’t have to.”
Being a great lawyer and a great business partner doesn’t preclude giving up the parts of you that make you a person, the GC says. Richardson has focused on creating a culture free of sharp elbows, where candor is appreciated, and where mistakes are understood to be a part of growth. The GC knows if she wouldn’t have been allowed to fail, she wouldn’t be where she is today.
“I want people on my team who are interested in psychological safety,” she says. “And I want to create environments that help support that mindset, from the top down to the bottom up.”
Richardson says she spent a great deal of her career giving others power that should have been reserved for herself. The questions she hopes more people will consider are: Have they given up the driver’s seat when it comes to things they truly care about? And what does it take to reclaim that power?
Maybe this is why the GC’s role keeps evolving and expanding. Richardson does the work, and she does it well, but there is so much more she brings to her role than professional excellence. She is redefining what it means to be professionally excellent.
