The author expresses skepticism towards the proliferation of "best of" awards in the legal industry, such as awards for top law firms, general counsels, and young lawyers. While the recipients of these awards are often deserving, the author suggests that these awards do not necessarily provide meaningful insights or help improve legal services.
The author points out that the reasons behind the selection of award winners can be varied, ranging from effective marketing campaigns to potential conflicts of interest. Even in the best-case scenario, where the winner is a great lawyer who delights their clients, the author questions how this information can directly benefit the reader in providing better legal services.
Instead, the author argues that it would be more valuable to know about the mistakes and underperformance of lawyers. Flagrant public mistakes, the author suggests, can provide great learning experiences, as it is often easier to learn from the mistakes of others rather than one's own. The author believes that understanding the actions and behaviors that led to poor performance would be more beneficial for improving legal services than simply celebrating the top performers.
toiselle kielelle
lähdeaineistosta
medium.com
Tärkeimmät oivallukset
by James Beller... klo medium.com 04-22-2024
https://medium.com/career-paths/what-the-heck-were-they-thinking-8df84f5221bbSyvällisempiä Kysymyksiä