Posts
Ms. Franke did an excellent job of showcasing how one law firm managed to offend both the "left" and the "right" with one statement after it decided not to support the Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA. Ms. Franke explains how this has become a public relations nightmare for King & Spalding's reputation.
Here are my thoughts about when a law firm finds itself walking a very thin line among clients with divergent viewpoints:
- Review the mission and values of the law firm. Can a law firm that represents evangelical Christians also defend the free speech rights of an atheist? Depends. If the firm values that the US Constitution protects the rights of the faithful and faithless, then it can serve both clients. If the partners believe that they have a call from God to defend Christianity, then serving conflicting clients will create...conflicts.
- Plan for damage control. I remember a case where a public relations agency that represented Planned Parenthood also represented a major Catholic archdiocese. Talk about a battle between pro-abortion and pro-life organizations. If this was a law firm representing both, then you have to work through various scenarios. Find a way to keep both clients, or decide which client you would rather keep and do what is necessary to break off from the second client. (I wish I could explain how to do this in a blog post.)
- Be transparent with your current clients. Before a law firm takes on a potentially "hot-button" new client, consider having a conversation with the clients who love your work and are advocates for your firm. Decide on which partners can talk to which clients and clue them in to the type of client you are considering that is likely to raise concern about certain groups. It's a great way to show mutual trust, and you might learn something in the process like how your current clients value your going to the mat when it's justified.
These are great issues that you raise and I believe there is no "one size fits all" answer in these cases. As you suggest, conflict is in the eye of the client and those valued relationships must be taken into consideration. I was president of a large pr firm that had a policy of not representing tobacco companies -- mainly because of the belief that using tobacco was harmful and should not be promoted. We also had clients promoting anti-smoking campaigns so that made the decision a little easier. The policy was debated heavily at our board meetings as millions of dollars in fee income could have been at stake. But in the long run, there were other large clients that applauded our stand and it probably enhanced our bottom line in the end.
ReplyDelete