In this segment I want to focus on a big challenge with applying three

pillars thinking to business decision-making.

And that is the gap between strategy and law.

This is the way the three pillars should operate in sync with each other,

creating the zone of sustainability.

I actually prefer to call that overlap in the middle

the zone of competitive advantage.

If you can overlap these circles, you have a great chance to achieve

competitive advantage over your competitors.

The problem is this is not the real world.

The problem is that while there's overlap between strategy and

ethics, and between strategy and law, there's often

a gap between the law pillar and the strategy pillar.

Just, for example, with law and

ethics there's a lot of overlap that we'll be covering later.

For example, legal concepts such as fiduciary duty and

fraud are very values-laden.

They provide great guidance when you're faced with ethical dilemmas, but

that kind of overlap does not exist between law and strategy.

Now, there are two big picture reasons.

Number one, law is very complex, and

it's misunderstood by a lot people because of complexity.

And there are also misconceptions about the role of a lawyer, so

let's talk about each of these.

Let's first of all start with the complexity of law.

Let me ask you this question.

Let's say that you have a bad experience with a business.

You've purchased one of their products and it hasn't worked as you hoped it would.

And so you go to a website and

you complain about the product, you tell about your experience.

You're very surprised the next week to learn that the company has filed suit

against you.

Now, what would be the legal basis of that lawsuit,

what would you call the theory that they would probably use in suing you?

They're going to claim that your statements about their product were false,

that you were lying about their product.

So what legal theory are they going to use?

Please hit pause and write down your answer.

The answer is defamation.

They're going to claim that you defamed the company

by your misstatements about their products.

Now, we're going to talk about defamation later on in this course.

It's a huge issue when it comes to terminating employees.

There's a huge risk that an employee who is fired

will file a defamation claim against the company.

But my question here is, just to understand the complexity of law a little

bit, defamation is an example of what type of law?

Can you answer that question?

And the answer is tort law, personal injury law.

And tort law is a part of yet a larger area of

law which I'm going to call private law.

And private law is a part of yet a larger area of law, substantive law.

And now we're getting to the very largest areas.

And here's a legal road map that I hope will be useful when you're dealing with

the complexity of law in the future.

As you can see here, law is divided into two broad categories,

substantive and procedural.

And these words mean pretty much what they say.

Substantive law deals with the substance of the law.

What are the rules and regulations that govern

the way you make business decisions, and the way you operate your business?

Whereas, procedural law focuses on

the legal procedures used to enforce substantive law.

As you might guess, substantive law is primarily a concern for

people running businesses.

Procedural law is primarily a concern for lawyers.

How do you file a lawsuit,

how do you appeal a lawsuit, what are the rules of evidence during a trial?

However, in recent years, over the past couple of decades at least,

there has been a movement called the ADR movement

which stands for alternative dispute resolution.

And as a result of this movement, non-lawyer business leaders

have been much more concerned about procedure.

This movement began because business leaders began to ask,

why is it that we outsource legal disputes to lawyers in the legal system?

We have great problem-solving skills,

why aren't we using these skills ourselves in resolving disputes?

And that let to the ADR movement and

the development of various processes that we'll be talking about later in the in

this course that can be used to resolve disputes.

Within law firms, I've heard people say that ADR has another meaning,

which is alarming drop in revenue.

However, that's actually a misstatement, many very prominent and

leading law firms are very active in ADR.

So we have the two broad categories of law, and then substantive

law is divided into two categories called private and public.

Now, some people would call private law civil law.

I don't like to use that term because it's used in other contexts.

It's used to distinguish criminal law from civil law,

and it's also used to distinguish common law countries from civil law countries.

So because it has different meanings,I prefer private law.

Private law basically focuses on the law involving individuals and

organizations where there's relatively little government involvement.

And the three main categories of private law are the law of contracts,

the law of torts, and the law of property.

Public law,

on the other hand, involves areas of the law where government is deeply involved.

We've got constitutional law, which basically defines

the responsibilities of government and the rights of citizens.

And we have criminal law where the public is the complainant,

the public in effect is a plaintiff,

filing suit against people alleged to have committed criminal conduct.

One specific aspect of public law that we will be focusing on quite bit is

regulatory law.

And we'll look at how regulatory law relates to the three branches of

government, and how businesses can use regulatory law.

So this is, again, a big picture road map of the law.

The endpoints in this road map, the six endpoints,

constitutional, criminal, contracts, torts and property, are so important

that they represent the required courses in law schools around the world.

If you are a law student entering law school with a mind of raw clay,

in effect, this is the way the clay is molded.

What we have here, in effect, is a picture of a lawyer’s brain.

If you happen to stumble across a dead lawyer in the your feature, and

you dissect him, this is what the brain looks like.

And that's very important to think about when you work with lawyers

because when you bring your business problem to lawyers, that problem

will pass through the lawyer's brain down these paths, and perhaps

hundreds of subpaths, until sometimes it seems as though you’re talking

at such a level of abstraction that it has little to do with your business problem.

Let's take a simple example, let's say that you had a great year in your

business, and you decide that you want to hold a Christmas party.

So, you ask your lawyer, hey, and problems with our party?

Well, right away, the lawyer's going to talk about

some of the things we'll discuss later in the course.

Have you thought about religious discrimination in

holding a Christmas party?

Have you thought about sexual harassment if you're serving alcoholic beverages at

the party and there's mistletoe around?

Have you thought about respondeat superior, which means liability for

employees who injure somebody on the way home?

Have you thought about workers compensation for

people who might be injured at the party?

All of a sudden, you're going to go down many,

many subpaths when you work with lawyers.

So complexity of the law is one reason for the gap between law and strategy.

The other reason is that lawyers are portrayed in

a particular way in the media and in popular culture.

We have TV shows, for instance, called LA Law.

Now, other professions aren't as popular, generally, apart from doctors,

aren't as popular.

So we have LA Law, we don't have shows called LA Accountant.

We've got shows called Law & Order,

we don't have shows called Cost Measurement and Control.

We've got Boston Legal, we don't have Boston Economist.

We've got Judge Judy, we don't have Operations Manager Fred.

For some reason law has captured the public fancy,

both in the media and the popular culture.

And what often comes out is that lawyers, basically,

are involved in litigation because that's the most dramatic piece of the law.

Let me ask you this question.

When you look at, for instance, federal cases in the United States,

what percentage of those cases do you think actually make it to trial?

Please hit pause and write down a percentage.

The percentage of civil cases that go to trial in the United States

is less than 2%.

So despite the media portrayal, despite what you see on TV,

litigation is actually a very small part of the work of a lawyer.

And a broader look at the work of a lawyer is depicted by this diagram.

Lawyers are essential to business in providing advice on

virtually every form of business activity, and

then certain activities require implementation of that advice.

Sometimes if there's a litigation decision made by business that involves following

through with the litigation.

But in most cases, it's so-called transactional work, making sure that

the transactions are completed in a way that meets your strategic goals.

Now in completing these transactions, one famous professor,

Professor Gilson from Columbia, has called lawyers transaction cost engineers.

I think that's too narrow because it only focuses on one piece of the lawyer's

activity.

I think a better term is risk management engineers.

The key role of a lawyer is to manage legal risks, and

here's a couple of quotes that illustrate that philosophy.

The CEO of a major consulting firm recently said,

Our lawyer is the person charged with protecting the corporation and

making sure risks are understood and managed appropriately.

The lawyer for the New York Giants professional football team said,

my goal is best characterized as how to get to yes while minimizing legal risk.

Legal risk is hugely important because recent surveys

of business people conclude that legal risk is the top risk concern in business.

And another survey by Norton Rose list the specific

types of legal risk that you face in business.

These are the most common, in order, in sequence.

Contracts, labor and employment, regulatory, personal injury,

intellectual property and patents, and dispute resolution processes.

And we're going to talk about each of these risks throughout the course.

But the bottom line is, because of the lawyer's emphasis on risk,

there's tension between law and strategy, and the gap between the two pillars.

The law focuses on risk management, strategy focuses on value creation.

Sometimes this is called risk versus reward.

A famous strategy professor I worked with over the years,

CK Prahalad, called it the sour versus the sweet.

Some of the executives I work with refer to the law department

as the Department of Sales Prevention or

the Department of No because of the emphasis on risk management.

And in our next segment we're going to talk about how,

given this gap between strategy and

law, how you can close the gap in a way that creates competitive advantage

Recognize the Gap Between the Strategy Pillar and the Law Pillar

Making Successful Decisions through the Strategy, Law & Ethics Model

与讲师见面