Unlike science researchers, whose peers review their submitted article and recommend or squash its publication, almost nothing written about managing a law department undergoes pre-publication scrutiny by peers. (Or, for that matter, post-publication scrutiny.) Journalists have an editor, to be sure, but they are both looking for a story, with a hook and good quotes and – ideally—novelty or a trend. It’s hard to find anyone who contests what they write
The absence of peer review is worse when consultants or general counsel writes. No one challenges the claims before they publish or says anything afterwards. That is why we have the phenomenon of the cult law department and the larger-than-life general counsel.
Management practices will improve faster if the articles written about them are subject to critical commentary. This blog welcomes criticism and disagreement. firstname.lastname@example.org