There’s
a
difference
from
what
they
tell
their
partners
and
what
they
expect.
A
lot
of
managing
partners
want
to
be
conservative.
—
Blane
Prescott,
a
managing
partner
and
law
firm
consultant
at
MesaFive,
in
comments
given
to
the
American
Lawyer
on
what
law
firm
leaders
are
doing
to
manage
expectations
for
partner
compensation
and
budgets
going
into
2025.
While
many
are
“bullish”
about
the
year
ahead,
they
may
be
far
more
prudent
when
making
their
2025
budgets.
Staci
Zaretsky is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to
email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on
X/Twitter
and
Threads
or
connect
with
her
on
LinkedIn.
For
a
while
now,
people
have
been
wondering
what
it
will
look
like
as
Millenials
and
Gen
Zers
represent
themselves
and
others
in
court.
Why
quote
Judge
Learned
Hand
when
brainrot
would
suffice?
But
these
aren’t
the
only
generations
trying
to
get
in
on
the
fun.
Judge
Gary
N.
Wilcox,
58,
was
ultimately
suspended
over
a
couple
of
TikTok
videos
that
were
unbecoming
of
a
judge.
ABA
Journal
has
coverage:
[Judge]
Wilcox
has
consented
to
discipline
and
stipulated
that
he
violated
ethics
rules
requiring
judges
to
observe
high
standards
of
integrity,
to
avoid
the
appearance
of
impropriety,
and
to
conduct
extrajudicial
activities
in
a
way
that
does
not
demean
the
judicial
office.
The
“demeaning
the
judicial
office”
in
question
involves
lip
syncing
to
some
of
Busta
Rhymes
and
Rihanna’s
innuendos,
wearing
a
Beavis
and
Butthead
tee
under
his
robes,
and
singing
from
his
bed.
Very
goofy,
yes,
but
far
less
demeaning
to
the
public’s
perception
of
improprietous
judicial
activities
than
something
that
actually
questions
the
judge’s
neutrality
when
performing
their
job
roles
like
flying
the
“We
Love
Coups
Actually”
flag
or
failing
to
honestly
fill
out
basic
disclosure
forms
for
decades.
It
should
be
less
demeaning,
at
least.
If
you
are
representing
a
client
and
the
best
defense
you’ve
been
able
to
craft
so
far
is
a
hail
Mary
“my
client
was
being
a
silly
guy,”
you’d
best
see
if
you
can
delay
the
court
date
for
three
months.
A
word
to
the
wise
Judge,
leave
the
lip
syncing
and
thirst
trapping
to
Loloverruled.
Chris
Williams
became
a
social
media
manager
and
assistant
editor
for
Above
the
Law
in
June
2021.
Prior
to
joining
the
staff,
he
moonlighted
as
a
minor
Memelord™
in
the
Facebook
group Law
School
Memes
for
Edgy
T14s.
He
endured
Missouri
long
enough
to
graduate
from
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
School
of
Law.
He
is
a
former
boatbuilder
who
cannot
swim, a
published
author
on
critical
race
theory,
philosophy,
and
humor,
and
has
a
love
for
cycling
that
occasionally
annoys
his
peers.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected] and
by
tweet
at @WritesForRent.
Trump,
for
whom
it
is
always
and
forever
1987,
is
up
in
his
feelings
about
Harris’s
appearance
on
“60
Minutes”
with
journalist
Bill
Whitaker.
At
first
Trump
insisted
she’d
faceplanted,
scoffing
that
it
was
“considered
by
many
of
those
who
reviewed
it,
the
WORST
Interview
they
have
ever
seen.”
But
soon
he
shifted
to
complaints
about
the
network’s
editorial
decisions,
claiming
that
the
network
had
cleaned
up
Harris’s
answers,
particularly
on
questions
about
Israel,
to
make
them
more
coherent.
Then,
in
a
post
accusing
Harris
of
being
“virtually
incoherent,”
Trump
went
from
describing
CBS’s
editorial
choices
as
“possibly
illegal”
to
“an
open
and
shut
case”
which
“must
be
investigated,
starting
today!”
“Just
imagine,
60
Minutes
actually
took
Lyin’
Kamala’s
answers,
and
CHANGED
THEM.
It’s
unthinkable.
They
are
in
big
trouble!”
he
yelled
into
the
cloudless
ether.
And
he
was
still
at
it
this
morning,
screeching
that
“CBS
should
lose
its
license”
and
“be
bid
out
to
the
highest
bidder.”
That’s
big
talk
from
a
candidate
who
spews
the
vilest
racism,
only
to
have
it
described
as
a
“fascination
with
genes
and
genetics.”
Perhaps
the
guy
who
spawned
the
neologism
“sanewashing”
should
simmer
down
about
networks
cleaning
up
a
candidate’s
prose.
“To
be
honest,
they’re
a
news
organization.
They
have
to
be
licensed
to
do
it.
They
ought
to
take
away
their
license
for
the
way
they
did
that,”
he
whined.
To
be
honest, no
they
don’t.
You
don’t
need
a
license
to
practice
journalism.
You
don’t
even
need
a
license
to
own
a
television
network.
The
FCC does
license
local
television
stations
which
use
the
scarce
broadcast
spectrum,
a
vestige
from
the
days
when
Americans
got
their
six
channels
through
metal
divining
rods
on
the
roof.
But
even
Trump
must
know
that
it
doesn’t
work
like
that
any
more.
But
more
to
the
point,
the
FCC
isn’t
going
after
television
networks
because
it
doesn’t
like
their
coverage,
no
matter
how
vile
and
mendacious.
(Cf
Fox
freakin’
News.)
As
current
FCC
Chair
Jessica
Rosenworcel
tweeted
during
the
last
campaign
when
Trump
tried
to
get
her
predecessor
Ajit
Pai
to
go
after
Comcast,
“The
FCC
doesn’t
sanction
stations
for
what
journalists
say.”
Rosenworcel
has
been
debunking
Trump’s
claims
since
at
least
2017,
when
she
penned
an
article
in Cosmopolitan
calling
it
an
absolute
affront
to
the
First
Amendment
for
a
sitting
president
to
demand
that
the
government
punish
speech.
And
she’s
still
at
it,
putting
out
a
statement
today
responding
to
Trump’s
calls
to
sanction
CBS:
While
repeated
attacks
against
broadcast
stations
by
the
former
President
may
now
be
familiar,
these
threats
against
free
speech
are
serious
and
should
not
be
ignored.
As
I’ve
said
before,
the
First
Amendment
is
a
cornerstone
of
our
democracy.
The
FCC
does
not
and
will
not
revoke
licenses
for
broadcast
stations
simply
because
a
political
candidate
disagrees
with
or
dislikes
content
or
coverage.
Trump
responded
by
posting
that
inflation
is
up,
manufacturing
jobs
are
down,
and
FEMA
has
abandoned
North
Carolina.
Then
he
took
credit
for
capping
insulin
costs
at
$35
a
month
in
2022.
But
don’t
say
on
air
that
those
are
abject
lies,
because
that’s
an
illegal
campaign
contribution
and
they’ll
take
away
your
license.
Nominations
are
now
open
for
the
Alli
Gerkman
Legal
Visionary
Award,
which
recognizes
an
innovator
who
has
made
significant
impacts
early
in
their
career
toward
making
the
American
legal
system
work
better
for
everyone.
The
award
is
designed
to
encourage
and
showcase
innovators,
risk
takers,
visionaries,
and
emerging
leaders
who
bring
a
different
perspective
and
a
reform-minded
approach
to
the
improvement
of
our
legal
system,
IAALS
says.
Candidates
should
be
early
in
their
legal
careers
to
be
eligible,
roughly
the
first
15
years.
Nominations
are
now
open
through
Nov.
1.
Nominations
may
be
made
by
others,
but
self-nominations
are
also
accepted.
The
biggest
roadblock
to
legal
tech
adoption
often
rests
between
the
lawyer’s
keyboard
and
the
chair.
It’s
not
that
firms
aren’t
out
there
buying
technology
—
either
with
the
help
of
IT
professionals
or
well-informed
consultants
—
but
after
the
money
gets
spent,
there’s
still
a
battle
ahead
to
get
lawyers
to
actually
use
this
stuff.
In
a
notoriously
tech-skeptic
profession,
the
challenge
is
almost
always
about
adoption.
Which
presents
an
all
new
problem
when
it
comes
to
generative
AI.
Because
unlike
a
new
accounting
tool,
merely
building
a
worthwhile
AI
product
depends
upon
adoption.
The
release
of
Clio
Duo
—
the
company’s
foray
into
generative
AI
—
dominated
the
Clio
Cloud
Conference
this
week.
For
now,
the
offering
is
focused
on
Clio’s
core
product
Clio
Manage,
with
plans
to
spread
its
capabilities
into
the
rest
of
Clio’s
products
going
forward.
But
I
saw
Clio
Duo
a
year
ago
and
found
it
a
solid
product
even
then.
So
what
took
so
long
to
get
to
wide
release?
Obviously,
it’s
mostly
about
beta
testing
and
perfecting
the
product
at
the
margins,
but
one
thing
I
hadn’t
considered
before
this
week
is
that
AI
flips
the
product
development
path
on
its
head,
making
the
profession’s
adoption
problem
an
even
more
pernicious
hurdle.
“The
build
cycle
for
AI
to
be
useful
is
completely
different
than
the
feature
cycle
of
the
past,”
said
Jonathan
Watson,
Clio’s
Chief
Technology
Officer.
“Because
you
actually
need
to
release
things,
and
people
need
to
legitimately
use
it,
not
just
give
you
their
opinions
on
it.
So
you
can
fuel
the
self-referential
learning
that
needs
to
happen
to
improve
the
quality
of
the
overall
product.”
Past
products
need
a
handful
of
dedicated
testers
to
pass
along
their
notes
and
observations
and
engineers
to
methodically
add
improvements
until
everyone
is
ready
to
go
gold.
But
generative
AI
doesn’t
work
like
that.
Even
old
machine
learning
didn’t
work
that
way!
With
the
non-generative
AI
tools
of
the
past,
a
developer
could
jam
it
full
of
a
bunch
of
data,
check
the
outcomes,
and
keep
training
until
the
outcomes
were
consistently
right
and
call
it
a
day.
But
generative
AI
products
improve
by
getting
fed
data,
context,
and
a
hefty
dose
of
real-world
applications.
There’s
a
unique,
symbiotic
relationship
between
lawyers
and
AI.
That’s
where
the
legal
profession’s
historical
resistance
to
new
technology
becomes
a
problem
because
getting
this
stuff
right
can’t
rely
on
a
couple
of
true
believers,
there
needs
to
be
a
critical
mass
of
adoption
at
the
beta
stage.
Watson
said,
“We
need
you
to
use
this
thing
and
it’s
going
to
get
better
every
day
over
the
next
like
month
because
we’re
refining
and
tuning
based
on
information
that
we’re
getting
back.
And
if
you
don’t
do
that,
it’s
going
to
take
us
a
lot
longer
to
work
our
way
through
it.
And
I
believe
every
AI
product
is
suffering
or
struggling
with
that
in
many,
many
different
ways.”
Imagine
that…
a
situation
where
lawyers
getting
involved
actually
makes
the
world
better.
In
the
past,
firms
could
afford
a
little
tech
conservatism.
But
if
AI
is
really
the
future
of
legal
work,
lawyers
can’t
wait
until
it’s
“perfected,”
they
need
to
dirty
their
hands
with
the
technology
to
advance
the
ball.
The
Clio
2024
Legal
Trends
Report showed
that
a
plurality
of
clients
want
lawyers
on
AI
and
roughly
70
percent
either
want
firms
using
AI
or
have
no
preference.
Unless
that
support
collapses,
lawyers
need
to
invest
in
the
tech
and
that
will
mean
crossing
the
adoption
threshold
sooner
than
later.
The
good
news
is
that
lawyers
seem
more
willing
to
engage
with
AI
than
they
have
with
previous
tech
advancements.
We’ve
already
seen
generative
AI
drive
more
lawyer
enthusiasm
than
past
products
and
the
Legal
Trends
Report
reflects
faster
adoption
than
normal.
Which
did
carry
over
to
the
Clio
Duo
development
process.
As
Watson
said,
“we
feel
so
good
where
it
is
now,
because
we’ve
narrowed
down
on
the
problems,
we
know
they’re
meaningful,
we
have
feedback
that
tells
us,
‘yes,
I
use
this,
and
it
saves
me
time,
and
I
miss
it
if
it’s
gone.’
And
all
of
these
really
great
signals
that
tell
you
you’ve
hit
that
level.”
Clio
has
the
luxury
of
serving
a
relatively
tech-savvy
slice
of
the
legal
community.
But
the
testing
adoption
issue
might
prove
more
problematic
for
other
sectors.
In
any
event,
if
lawyers
really
believe
in
the
potential
for
generative
AI
to
improve
their
workflow,
they
can’t
afford
to
wait
until
some
magic
product
drops
from
the
heavens.
Get
in
on
the
development
process
now.
In
today’s
fast-paced,
tech-driven
world,
the
intersection
of
law
and
technology
is
more
relevant
than
ever.
As
legal
professionals,
we
often
find
ourselves
collaborating
with
developers
and
tech
teams
to
build
innovative
products
while
ensuring
compliance
and
minimizing
risks.
In
a
recent
conversation
I
had
with
Laura
Jeffords
Greenberg,
senior
director
of
legal
at
Worksome,
we
delved
into
the
unique
challenges
and
opportunities
that
arise
when
lawyers
and
developers
work
together.
Laura
shared
her
journey
from
a
sports
lawyer
to
a
tech-savvy
legal
expert,
offering
invaluable
insights
into
how
lawyers
can
effectively
navigate
this
evolving
landscape.
Here
are
some
key
takeaways
from
our
discussion
that
highlight
strategies
for
fostering
better
collaboration
between
legal
and
tech
teams.
1.
Building
Relationships
With
Developers:
The
Foundation
For
Effective
Collaboration
Laura
emphasizes
the
importance
of
building
strong
relationships
with
developers
as
a
cornerstone
for
successful
collaboration.
She
recalls
her
early
days
at
a
tech
startup,
where
she
shared
an
office
with
the
CTO
and
made
a
concerted
effort
to
understand
the
technology
they
were
developing.
This
proximity
allowed
her
to
learn
the
language
of
developers,
gain
insights
into
their
processes,
and
build
trust.
To
replicate
this,
Laura
suggests
that
legal
professionals:
Show
Genuine
Interest.
Take
the
time
to
understand
what
the
developers
are
working
on
and
why
it’s
important.
Ask
them
to
explain
their
projects
and
processes
in
simple
terms
and
show
enthusiasm
about
their
work.
Learn
Basic
Coding.
Even
a
rudimentary
understanding
of
coding
can
go
a
long
way
in
bridging
the
gap
between
legal
and
tech.
It
demonstrates
a
willingness
to
learn
and
understand
the
developers’
world,
fostering
mutual
respect
and
collaboration.
Use
Clear
And
Concise
Communication.
Restate
what
you’ve
heard
in
your
own
words
to
ensure
understanding
and
to
confirm
that
you’re
on
the
same
page.
This
technique
helps
avoid
misunderstandings
and
shows
that
you
are
actively
listening.
2.
The
Power
Of
Asynchronous
Communication
In
our
discussion,
Laura
highlighted
the
effectiveness
of
asynchronous
communication,
particularly
for
distributed
teams
or
teams
with
varying
schedules.
Asynchronous
communication
allows
team
members
to
share
information
and
updates
without
requiring
an
immediate
response,
thereby
respecting
everyone’s
time
and
work
style.
Key
practices
for
asynchronous
communication
include:
Documenting
Everything.
Encourage
a
culture
of
documentation
where
all
decisions,
processes,
and
updates
are
recorded
in
a
central
repository.
This
not
only
helps
in
maintaining
clarity
but
also
ensures
that
new
team
members
can
easily
onboard
and
understand
the
context
of
past
decisions.
Setting
Clear
Expectations.
Let
your
team
know
your
availability
and
preferred
communication
channels.
For
example,
Laura
blocks
out
specific
times
for
deep
work
and
clearly
communicates
when
she
will
be
available
to
respond
to
questions.
Using
Technology
To
Your
Advantage.
Tools
like
Slack,
Microsoft
Teams,
and
other
collaboration
platforms
can
facilitate
asynchronous
communication.
Integrating
AI
tools
to
automate
repetitive
tasks
and
manage
FAQs
can
further
enhance
efficiency.
3.
Leveraging
Technology
For
Legal
Efficiency
Laura’s
experience
shows
that
technology
can
be
a
powerful
ally
for
legal
professionals.
From
using
AI
to
automate
routine
tasks
to
adopting
tools
that
improve
contract
management,
technology
can
help
lawyers
focus
on
higher-value
work.
Some
practical
ways
to
leverage
technology
in
your
legal
practice
include:
Automating
Routine
Tasks.
Use
platforms
like
DocuSign
for
automating
document
workflows,
enabling
self-service
for
frequently
used
contracts,
and
integrating
AI
for
answering
repetitive
queries.
Adopting
AI
Tools.
AI
can
help
analyze
large
volumes
of
data,
provide
insights,
and
predict
outcomes,
making
it
an
essential
tool
for
modern
legal
teams.
Laura
mentions
tools
like
Legal
OS,
which
uses
AI
to
answer
complex
policy-related
questions,
saving
time
and
increasing
accuracy.
Encouraging
Continuous
Learning.
Stay
updated
with
the
latest
technological
advancements.
Regularly
explore
new
tools
and
platforms
that
can
improve
your
workflow
and
keep
you
ahead
of
the
curve.
4.
Setting
Boundaries
And
Managing
Expectations
A
crucial
aspect
of
thriving
in
a
tech
environment
is
setting
clear
boundaries
and
managing
expectations.
Laura
stresses
the
importance
of
maintaining
a
healthy
work-life
balance
and
ensuring
that
you
are
not
constantly
in
reactive
mode.
To
achieve
this,
consider
the
following
strategies:
Define
Your
Working
Hours.
Make
sure
your
team
and
colleagues
are
aware
of
your
working
hours
and
respect
them.
Use
tools
like
calendar
blockers
to
set
aside
time
for
focused
work.
Communicate
Clearly.
Be
upfront
about
your
availability
and
the
best
ways
to
reach
you.
Encourage
your
team
to
use
the
appropriate
channels
for
different
types
of
queries.
Prioritize
Your
Tasks.
Focus
on
high-priority
tasks
and
learn
to
delegate
or
defer
less
critical
ones.
This
helps
in
managing
your
time
better
and
reduces
stress.
5.
The
Importance
Of
Understanding
Your
Product
One
of
Laura’s
standout
pieces
of
advice
is
for
lawyers
to
deeply
understand
the
products
their
teams
are
building.
She
stresses
that
using
the
product
or
at
least
having
a
basic
understanding
of
its
functionality
can
significantly
improve
the
quality
of
legal
advice
provided.
Here’s
how
you
can
apply
this:
Get
Hands-On.
Use
the
products
your
team
is
developing
to
understand
its
features,
limitations,
and
potential
legal
implications.
This
hands-on
experience
is
invaluable
in
providing
relevant
and
practical
legal
advice.
Stay
Curious.
Continuously
ask
questions
about
new
developments,
features,
or
technologies
your
team
is
working
on.
This
not
only
keeps
you
informed
but
also
shows
your
team
that
you
are
invested
in
their
work.
Engage
With
Other
Departments.
Regularly
interact
with
other
departments
such
as
product,
marketing,
and
sales
to
get
a
holistic
view
of
how
your
product
fits
into
the
market
and
any
legal
considerations
that
may
arise.
Final
Thoughts
Navigating
the
intersection
of
law
and
technology
requires
a
unique
blend
of
legal
expertise,
technological
understanding,
and
excellent
communication
skills.
By
building
strong
relationships
with
developers,
leveraging
asynchronous
communication,
embracing
technology,
and
setting
clear
boundaries,
legal
professionals
can
thrive
in
a
tech-driven
environment.
Laura
Jeffords
Greenberg’s
insights
provide
a
valuable
roadmap
for
lawyers
looking
to
enhance
their
collaboration
with
tech
teams
and
drive
innovation
within
their
organizations.
For
a
deeper
dive
into
these
strategies
and
more,
tune
into
the
full
episode
with
Laura.
Whether
you’re
a
legal
professional
in
a
tech
company
or
just
curious
about
the
future
of
law
and
technology,
this
episode
is
packed
with
practical
advice
and
inspiration
to
help
you
succeed.
Olga
V.
Mack
is
a
Fellow
at
CodeX,
The
Stanford
Center
for
Legal
Informatics,
and
a
Generative
AI
Editor
at
law.MIT.
Olga
embraces
legal
innovation
and
had
dedicated
her
career
to
improving
and
shaping
the
future
of
law.
She
is
convinced
that
the
legal
profession
will
emerge
even
stronger,
more
resilient,
and
more
inclusive
than
before
by
embracing
technology.
Olga
is
also
an
award-winning
general
counsel,
operations
professional,
startup
advisor,
public
speaker,
adjunct
professor,
and
entrepreneur.
She
authored Get
on
Board:
Earning
Your
Ticket
to
a
Corporate
Board
Seat, Fundamentals
of
Smart
Contract
Security,
and Blockchain
Value:
Transforming
Business
Models,
Society,
and
Communities. She
is
working
on
three
books:
Visual
IQ
for
Lawyers
(ABA
2024), The
Rise
of
Product
Lawyers:
An
Analytical
Framework
to
Systematically
Advise
Your
Clients
Throughout
the
Product
Lifecycle
(Globe
Law
and
Business
2024),
and
Legal
Operations
in
the
Age
of
AI
and
Data
(Globe
Law
and
Business
2024).
You
can
follow
Olga
on
LinkedIn
and
Twitter
@olgavmack.
If
your
social
media
feed
is
anything
like
mine,
it’s
filled
with
stories
of
Gen
Z
failing
at
work.
It’s
sparked
by
a
recent
survey
by
Intelligent
about
how
Gen
Z
is
faring
in
the
workplace
—
and
it’s
not
great.
Sixty
percent
of
employers
said
they’ve
had
to
fire
Gen
Z
hires
only
months
after
they’ve
been
onboarded.
Hiring
managers
said
the
generation
is
“unprepared
for
the
workforce,
can’t
handle
the
workload,
and
are
unprofessional,”
with
90%
saying
Gen
Z
needs
etiquette
training.
Intelligent’s
Chief
Education
and
Career
Development
Advisor
Huy
Nguyen
said,
“Many
recent
college
graduates
may
struggle
with
entering
the
workforce
for
the
first
time
as
it
can
be
a
huge
contrast
from
what
they
are
used
to
throughout
their
education
journey.”
Nguyen
continued
in
the
harsh
assessment,
“They
are
often
unprepared
for
a
less
structured
environment,
workplace
cultural
dynamics,
and
the
expectation
of
autonomous
work.
Although
they
may
have
some
theoretical
knowledge
from
college,
they
often
lack
the
practical,
real-world
experience
and
soft
skills
required
to
succeed
in
the
work
environment.”
Now
that
the
oldest
Gen
Zers
are
starting
to
graduate
law
school
and
enter
not
just
the
workforce,
but
the
legal
workforce,
it
has
us
at
Above
the
Law
wondering
how
it’s
going.
Well,
one
experienced
Florida
lawyer,
Sheila
Zolnoor,
took
to
TikTok
to
share
an
infuriating
experience
dealing
with
Gen
Z
at
work.
If
this
story
is
any
indication,
reality
is
going
to
be
a
rude
awakening.
So
i
undertsand
professional
boundaries
and
i
dont
think
people
need
to
work
themselves
to
the
bone.
I
am
a
proponent
of
a
3
or
4
day
workweek
and
leaving
the
office
when
youre
done
with
your
work—even
if
thats
11:30
am
and
nor
5pm.
Ok?
So
i
am
down
for
that
cause.
But
i
also
think
we
need
to
appreciate
where
we
are
in
our
career…if
i
have
29
days
experience,
there’s
a
chance
i
haven’t
really
started
to
nanage
my
time
right
yet
and
maybe
i
need
to
stretch
myself
a
little
further
til
i
learn
the
ropes…is
that
outrageous??
Whatever
im
willing
to
be
wrong…thanks
for
the
vent
session.
#lawtok
#law
#lawyersoftiktok
#lawyer
#genz
#fired
#workethic
#boundaries
#getoffmylawn
#storytime
Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of
The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter
@Kathryn1 or
Mastodon
@[email protected].
Private
equity
forms
an
important
part
of
investors’
portfolios,
but
the
market
has
recently
been
buffeted
by
economic
headwinds.
Asset
managers
are
also
being
impacted
by
a
substantial
amount
of
regulatory
change,
and
clients
are
working
with
multiple
investors
across
different
funds.
All
of
which
creates
a
complex
landscape
that
must
be
handled
with
dexterity,
bearing
in
mind
all
the
various
obligations,
needs,
and
drivers
in
the
mix.
In
this
environment,
asset
managers
need
to
adapt
to
thrive
—
and
they
need
their
outside
counsel
to
do
likewise.
For
law
firms,
leveraging
software
solutions
to
provide
unique
experiences
that
facilitate
collaboration
and
smooth-out
the
fund
formation
process
should
help
attract
and
retain
clients,
and
solve
ongoing
productivity
and
profitability
challenges.
Is
it
time
to
reimagine
your
approach
to
fund
formation?
Here,
our
friends
at
Thomson
Reuters
provide
some
fundamental
questions
to
ask.
Attorneys
General
from
which
states
recently
filed
suit
against
TikTok
alleging
it
targets
and
manipulates
young
users?
Hint:
As
one
state
AG
said,
“TikTok
pushes
its
young
users
to
spend
all
of
their
time
on
the
platform
with
no
regard
for
the
effect
it
has
on
their
mental
health
and
well-being.
TikTok
built
a
platform
to
exploit
teens
for
profit,
and
its
reason
for
doing
so
is
simple.
One
word:
greed.”
Staci
Chris
Olga
Kathryn
