Fleur Katsmartin on the power of authenticity and humility for in-house lawyers

Episode: Fleur Katsmartin on the power of authenticity and humility for in-house lawyers
Run time: 29:33

Voiceover: This is a Lander & Rogers podcast, bringing you fresh perspectives on the legal and business landscape and life through a legal lens.

Anthony Kearns: Welcome to Legal human, podcast focused on the role of human lawyers in the legal ecosystem and society more broadly. I'm your host, Anthony Kearns. I'm very pleased to welcome Fleur Katsmartin, Chief Legal Officer from Royal Melbourne Hospital.

Fleur Katsmartin: Thanks, Anthony.

AK: So Fleur, I just wanted to start with a few questions to set the context, your context as a human lawyer. You obviously work within Royal Melbourne Hospital and the broader context being the public health system. What are some of the, for people who don't sort of occupy that space, what are some of the sort of more interesting or challenging features of that as a human system, particularly at the moment?

FK: Well, look, you know, it's interesting with your intro, the, the enduring suffering, I think of, of lawyers and health lawyers, and in particular public health lawyers at the moment. Look, I think we operate in such a critical environment. I don't want to say anyone else is less critical, but public health, I think especially in COVID, post-COVID, COVID-normal era now has really highlighted the importance of, you know, I actually think the legal support of the health system generally. You know, I think some of the interesting things we do - I say, you know, no two days are the same. I'm either figuring out how I get a body out of the morgue fast enough versus, you know, commercialisation of IP, data security, your medico-legal, taxation, international issues, you name it. So, it's a fruit salad of legal, legal issues, I'd say, in public health. And the overarching government, political structure that we deal with.

AK: And what about the human system, in terms of relationally, what are you, what are some of the more interesting or sort of, complex dynamics there?

FK: Clinicians are exceptional human beings. They're, you know, they save us, they fix us. But, you know, dealing with them and learning to speak their language is a process in itself, something that I've learned since being at the hospital. You know, I think being in public health, human relation is, is critical. You know, this isn't just a… I don't see, and we don't employ legal, as a post box at RMH where you send a query and you get an answer spat out. Moreso it is all about the relationship, being able to communicate with a whole variety of different stakeholders, who are all very good at what they do and very passionate about what they do, but ensuring that they actually understand what we're trying to do as well.

AK: And in terms of your team, you've touched on this, the legal function within the hospital. How would you describe the purpose of that team, that function, to other people? How do you describe the function of the purpose of legal?

FK: We've really tried to, I guess, break open what the purpose is of legal services at RMH. This has been a long process. We're still in the works of that, but it's really driving, you know, value; ensuring that we're sitting in that strategic space, and providing something that aligns really clearly, not only with the strategic pillars of the organisation, but also the values of leading with kindness. You know, our legal services are delivered with kindness. You know, we put people first. So it's - and we lead with excellence, so these are the things which, you know, should underpin the way we deliver our services across the organisation.

AK: I just want to touch on your path as a human lawyer to this point, to where you sit now and start where you are. You know, we talk a lot about being a lawyer as more a sense of identity, or informs our sense of identity, not just a role. What does being a lawyer mean to you? What's your sort of definition of that?

FK: It's a really good question, Anthony, because I know and I've, you know, said publicly before, as a law student when I was clerking at a firm to not be named, but a very large firm, I was told that my laugh was too loud and my hair was too big to be a lawyer, which completely shattered me and my confidence at that point. And, you know, as time has gone on and I've been - now, I look back and I'm quite thankful for those comments because it really highlighted to me that if I was going to stay in the industry, you know, I wanted to be me. So, you know, take me as I am or don't take me at all. You know, and I think there is a perception, less so in in-house, I'd say, in certain sectors, but probably more in private practice as to what a lawyer is and how we define ourselves as that. But I think it's really important - you spend so much time at work, if you cannot be yourself - and with that, you know, comes humility. You know, one of the first jobs I ever went for, they asked me what characteristics I thought were important as a lawyer. And I said being humble. And there was a scoff from the interview panel, one person in particular. But I got the job, so, you know, they must have appreciated it. But it's, you know, you need to bring your own brand, and who you are as a person into what you do, as opposed to putting, you know, who you are - what you do into who you are, if that makes sense. At least that's what I think.

AK: I just want to pick up on that theme of humility. Why is that so important in your sort of definition?

FK: Well, you know, I think, we're all just - we're all just people. You know, you're doing a podcast on legal and human. I find it a little bit entertaining you keep referring to me as a human lawyer, waiting for the bot to be wheeled out and say "here we are!". But no, you know, we are humans. We yearn for connection, we yearn for purpose. We yearn for, you know, wanting to feel appreciated and all these sorts of things. And I don't think that differs being in the legal profession, especially because we're all overachievers, you know, we all want to be liked and loved and cared for. But with that comes this, you know, level of needing to, you know, to demonstrate humility in how we deliver things.

AK: Well, you've sort of given me a great segue into sort of framing…

FK: You didn't even pay me for that, Anthony!

AK: I know… the podcast, I mean, the stimulus for this has really been just a really pervasive conversation I think around, across the profession and generally across society, around enabling technology or generative AI in particular, and it seems to be presented to us as offering in equal measure, sort of, opportunity and challenge. So the opportunities, I think, particularly as I talk to in-house legal, and I work with in-house legal, the opportunity seems to be largely around removing what we call BAU or sort of low-value work, enabling us then or unlocking the potential to do something else, which we describe as high value. I think the conversation we're not having consistently is, what is that higher value work? And are we equipped as a profession consistently to occupy, to do it, to occupy that space of higher value? And if not, what is it that we need to emphasise in our development, and our preparation of lawyers, and equipping lawyers to occupy that space? So I'm interested in your take on, you know, you went back - if we go back to what the purpose of your function that you've described, to what extent is the work of your team, the work of the people in your team aligned to what you consider to be the purpose of the function?

FK: Look, it's a tough one because I think, you know, at times I do say to the team, we are the victims of our own success. We have worked so hard to break through that we are now relied upon at times for work that isn't really legal, may not be strategic, and could fall into that category of low value. I definitely, you know, I move away from no value because I think everything we do has value. Like, and I think to diminish that would be, in my view, incorrect. But having said that, and I think you've touched on an interesting point, you know, if we get rid of and believe all the promises from all the advertisements and this amazing AI, you know, you get rid of that baseline of, of tasks and things that we do and we just do as bread and butter, you know, then what do we do?

AK: Yeah.

FK: And, you know, I think, I know for myself, the more I've developed and grown personally and professionally, you know, stakeholder engagement is so critical. But if you've always been doing this work, you know, how do you then capitalise on going into a completely different space for all intents and purposes, because you're not doing that lower level. And I think for some it's probably easier than others - they have more exposure, you know, I guess at more senior level, you know, you might be sitting on the executive, you might be, you know, you have awareness and accessibility to the Board. But I think for many that's not there. And where do they learn those skills?

AK: So we'll come to the developmental question in a moment. But just to pick up on a couple of the things you've just mentioned - this strategic advisor or trusted advisor that we talk about a lot, or strategic partner. If you distill that down into the work. Now, what is the work of being a strategic partner or trusted advisor? What would be your take on that?

FK: Oh, that feels like a Miss Universe question, to be honest, Anthony. But you know, I think it's, look, it's the work. At times, you know, we talk about in my team about pulling it all together. You know, I think, sometimes the work we do is considered purely legal. You know, you can put that as, you know, you're drafting, writing advice, whatever else. And then this strategic kind of, where you actually have, and it's, you know, it's an important skill set that as lawyers we have and it makes us good at what we do, that we can see the whole picture. That we can sit in the room with our key stakeholders on a matter and pull together things that, in their isolation, they may not have considered. And you kind of work in putting that jigsaw puzzle together to provide that, you know, critical advice which goes broader than legal in terms of, you know, trying to figure out those solutions for your stakeholders.

AK: So I get the sense that what you're doing is synthesising your legal knowledge with the sort of broader needs of the context, the, the system that you're working with. So is there an element there of having a broad enough interest in that system to understand or to engage in the conversation? Curiosity, for want of a better word?

FK: There has to be. And look, you know, I think for in-house counsel, you know, I was at a summit only last week where the discussion was, how broad is the legal function? Does it include risk, compliance, privacy, you know, security? You name it. Because, you know, very much gone are the days where you're like, well, yeah, as I said - legal, here's your post box, I'll give you your advice and that's it. You know, the value that we add, you might not be responsible for all the functions, but you definitely need to have the ability to pull that all together because, you know, I think that's a real value add that we provide that others in an organisation generally may not have the skill set to do.

AK: And presumably also that differentiates you from the legal providers, the external legal providers, that sort of institutional knowledge and the synthesis of advice into that context is the value that you add. FK: Yeah.

AK: It's not just post box, it's a creative synthesis of what you're getting out of the supply chain into something that's useful to the organisation.

FK: Yes, I think so.

AK: What are the behaviours, capabilities, mindsets, ways of being that you feel… if we take out that, if we do accept the promise of generative AI - and I have no reason to doubt that, I think it is going to be disruptive and it's going to be a powerful force - and that what we understand it can do is taken out of the equation or we're enabled to do that, what are the capabilities and behaviours and mindsets that become critical? So, imagine you're advising a lawyer starting out in their career about their pathway to that value. What are the things that they need to focus on?

FK: Being curious, you know. Asking questions, and being courageous, I think in terms of, you know, I guess, some aspects, but in terms of, you know, capabilities, I know we spoke about this - I tend, and this might make me seem very outdated myself, but I think there is real value in that lower value work when you're more junior because I think, you know - you can kind of imagine 20 years from now where we will operate, potentially in a world where generative AI does a lot of that baseline stuff that we don't need to do, so you'll have law students finishing study and then going straight into the profession in a situation where they're not required to struggle, you know, the enduring suffering that we laughed about earlier, you know, I think there's some, there's value in that initially. You don't want to be doing that for your whole career, or you'll probably leave. But I think as you're starting out, it gives you that baseline and it helps you, you know, hone your skills in a way you don't learn at university and you don't really learn doing your graduate diploma either, whether it be College of Law or whatever else, you need that on-the-ground experience. And I think when you have that, you can then build the other relevant, you know, capabilities in terms of stakeholder engagement, in terms of strategic thinking, leadership, management, wherever you're looking to go, governance, compliance. And you kind of add it to your, you know, bag of tricks. But I think there is the risk - and as I said, we'll look back on this recording in about 20 years' time and I'll be replaced by a bot - but I do think there is that value for, especially juniors starting out, to understand how the system works.

AK: And so what are some of the… you mentioned a few of them collectively, but if you think, if you unpack, say (sorry to use that term), but if you were to distill something like leadership or strategic thinking down into capabilities and behaviours. Are these things that you, for example, do you find in a young lawyer that joins your team, or are you taking steps to develop those, and if so, how are they developing them and what are they? What are these behaviours you're noticing early?

FK: I think, it's I think it's both, to be honest. I think, you know, again, perhaps controversially, I think some people have it and some people don't. That doesn't mean you can't cultivate and grow it. But it's really, you know, I think there's so much competition in the industry now, in-house or otherwise, that you need to be proactive to be able to expand your horizons. So, you know, as a junior, my guidance would be, you know, you have to be on the front foot. You need to be out there, and I've given this advice to junior lawyers that I'm mentoring, that for you to make yourself be seen and heard, you need to be seen and heard.

AK: Yeah.

FK: So, you know, with that comes the development of leadership, there's… or managerial, learning how to deal with teams or team dynamics, learning to manage up, manage down - a lot of those things you can learn, I don't think the expectation is anyone knows that when they start out. But you need to have that, you know, curiosity about yourself initially to get that going, or else I think you'll be left behind.

AK: I also get the sense from where you started this conversation, your anecdote about having a laugh that was too loud, that sense of leveraging your strengths relationally like the…

FK: Yes.

AK: Showing up as - I hate to use this word because it has all sorts of connotations, but your authentic self. But being the person you are is really important relationally, that, it's hard to sustain playing a role that's not you in your interaction with others.

FK: Definitely. You know, after that interaction in my first legal gig, you know, I went to the interview with my hair slicked back and a plain black suit, and I kept up that facade, to be fair, for probably the first few months. But then you spend so much time and you create relationships with people, and it takes a lot of effort to deny yourself who you are. And, you know, we talk in my team now about authenticity and delivering legal services with our authentic selves, because I think we're all so purpose-driven and we're all so focused on value, comes with that, you know, us being human. Good for the podcast, that should be your catch phrase! But us being human and being ourselves in how we work with others. And we're not - sorry, just to say that we're not everyone's cup of tea. You know, I'm not out there by any means saying everyone will like me, and I'm not striving for that either. You know, with that is coupled the expertise and what we can provide as the function, while being ourselves.

AK: I want to go to development because you touched on it. But before I do that, do you feel that there's a selection or homogenisation event that you're sort of touching on in that observation about the things that were unacceptable early in your career, is sort of filtering us into a… it might be filtering out some of the things we need later on? Are we… I don't know how to phrase this exactly, but are we selecting for the right things, or are we trying to contain lawyers into something that's not necessarily future-proof in the way that we're sort of, what we value in the definition of a lawyer?

FK: Well, you know, Anthony, I think the statistics highlight that in terms of how many people leave the profession, or where you have, you know, people from law school going in and burning out or stepping out and wanting to do something completely different. You know, I think of when I studied back in the Stone Age, that ultimately, you know, a lot of people I went to law school with aren't lawyers anymore. Now, there's a number of factors that would feed into that. But part of it was, you know, do you fit the mould? Is this where you see yourself? Do you want to be another one of what you've seen, or is there something more for you?

AK: You said that, or you seem to describe a developmental pathway that's phased, in the sense that you seem to have accepted, the assumption in what you said, that legal education will remain largely the same. And what might change is the way that we develop lawyers from that moment on. What if they were contempora… what if they were both being developed at the same time? What if, what if we were to focus on the development of human skills or the human component we've been talking about, as early as law school? We change the emphasis? You know, how do you develop and equip the profession, the future profession, to occupy this thing you're talking about?

FK: I feel like we should patent this! This would be a great idea, we could make a lot of money. We could nail this. But, you know, I think I see it in other industries, in the health sector, we talk a lot about with the University of Melbourne, about, you know, how they're developing junior doctors and what skills do we need to put in place to support them transition from, you know, education to where we go to, and RMH is a training hospital. So we, we really work closely to try and make sure that it's an effective transition, but that you're not going from just something theoretical to the practical where there's a real disconnect. And I do think, you know, that still remains in the legal profession. The question is, how do we address it early on? Because it is so theory-based. Not to say that I didn't love trust law or taxation as subjects. But, you know, I guess until you're actually in a working environment, I think it's hard to understand how you combine the theory and the practice.

AK: Yeah, and that's only one transition, right? So you've got the other transition we talk a lot about is coming out of a large firm into an in-house function.

FK: Breaking free! Letting go of the chains and running for the hills [laughs].

AK: Yeah. And the legal supply chain is interesting in the sense that you recruit largely from the supply chain. You're the only supply chain I think that does that consistently. And in-house general counsel often talk about the need to sort of break some of the habits from law firm experience and change the way that people are behaving. And what I love about the in-house profession is it's, you're in relationships you can't sort of walk away from, or, you're in the system and you're trying to advise the system at the same time, and you can't retreat from some of those relationships. They're literally at your desk. So, you know, that transition when you, when you bring a lawyer in from the supply chain into your team, what are some of the priorities and, and how are you creating a developmental pathway for that person?

FK: Well, I think, you know, one of the, the big ones is, is ensuring that they're aware now they have skin in the game. I think for a lot of the more junior lawyers that I've worked with that have crossed over from the dark side, you know, they're used to the QA process. So you get the QA by your senior associate, might go to a special counsel, might go to a partner. You know, things are checked perhaps 100 times - I'm exaggerating, of course - and then you end up being in-house where, you know, the teams are small, there's probably less opportunity to work as a group on things, which I know is at times difficult. But also, they don't have that level of QA. So, you know, they need to back themselves. Which can be really daunting, I think initially because all of a sudden, you need to advise and stand behind your advice. And if you're concerned, you can seek guidance from someone more senior or, you know, escalate. But it's, it's knowing that you now have responsibility. But I think with that comes value and growth and development, because then they realise that they know what they're doing. Or if they don't know, they can fix it. We often talk about, you know, making mistakes and how important it is because in my mind, the key KPI isn't not to make mistakes, it's to make mistakes and how quickly can we… how agile are we in responding to those? And in my mind that's probably, well, that is much more critical.

AK: So much in that when…

FK: I'm just trying to provide you with topics so you bring me back again!

AK: So for the listeners, I mean, you're referring to QA as quality assurance.

FK: Yes.

AK: So the sort of safety nets for a lawyer in a large firm, whereas in yours they're quite often the only person. And is that why you emphasised courage when you were describing..?

FK: Yes, definitely. You need to, you know, sometimes it's not even just putting your toe in the water. It's falling in the pool and learning how to swim if you don't know how. And I've seen it happen, you know, in much smaller teams than my own and sharing experiences with my peers across a number of sectors where, you know, it's daunting, but it's also, it gives you a greater sense of purpose. It helps you understand your value as legal within an organisation, because you then become relied upon as well.

AK: What's your role, then as a, you know, with your formal authority, leadership in that function? And it's obviously a tension in there and them feeling supported and safe to take those risks, but knowing that they have to take those risks, that they have to abandon some of the reliance on QA that they've experienced to that point, which is filled with risk, right?

FK: 100%. But it's not, again, and I know I said it's sink or swim, but it actually isn't, because a lot of the discussions I have with perhaps the more junior members of my team is that, you know, I'm not leaving anyone out to dry. I'm, I'm there whenever they need me. Ask the questions, let's bounce ideas. You know, I often say that I'll be their toughest opponent. If they can get me across the line, then they should have no issues in going head to head with, you know, a partner from a big firm across the other side of the table. We still need to, you know, develop and invest, but it's not the same as me sitting there with a red pen and redrafting because I don't like the tone of their document or I could have written it differently myself.

AK: Okay, so just picking up some of the threads. You feel, I think that we don't want to abandon all of the, what we describe as low-value, euphemistically, work because there's developmental value in it.

FK: I think so. Look, my view on this may change as time goes on and, you know, the AI becomes much more commonplace and it ends up being critical or standardised, I should say, across everywhere. Well, we just know that's how it is. But, you know, looking back on my own career and the flogging, the hours of flogging that I used to do, there's definite value in it from a developmental perspective. Even though the work at times may not be as high value as I would have liked.

AK: So what turns that into a deliberately developmental experience as opposed to just a flogging?

FK: The crying under the table [laughs]. No but, you know, part of it is, and I do bang on a lot about stakeholder engagement. You learn how to manage up. You know, you learn - I think about my time in private practice and otherwise, learning how to manage your managers, learning how to manage being in-house, members of the exec or, you know, general managers or people who you may consider have more authority than you, but how you take and tackle these tasks really helps you drive how you can then engage in those circumstances. You know, so I think engagement is key. Even honing your skills and picking up on things. I remember being a very, very junior lawyer where I felt like I knew nothing. But I had a really great attention to detail. So, if there was a full stop missing in that document, Anthony, I'd pick it up! And at the time it seems quite simplistic, but I still got that. And I think that that's something which, you know, once you've learnt that and it's in your head, it's always there. And I think there is still value in those sorts of things. A full stop or comma is very important!

AK: So, at your stage in your career, you know, I'm not going to say late-stage career. At your sort of mid-stage career as a young and vibrant in-house lawyer, how optimistic are you for the future contribution of human lawyers to the legal ecosystem and society more broadly?

FK: Look, you know, I joke a lot about us being replaced by bots or ChatGPT or whatever else. And sometimes I'll see what ChatGPT writes and I'm like, far out, that's much more eloquent than I could have put it! But you know, what excites me is that, it comes back to something earlier you'd said, what our conception of what a lawyer was, you know, even when I started out, versus what it is now, versus what it might be, lawyers just don't do the law anymore. And I think that will grow more and more. And I think that's what's exciting, because we end up being, you know, the jane of all trades, master of none, perhaps. But the diversity, our skill set, you know, all that we can contribute will just expand, I think. And so, what we define as a lawyer 20 years from now will be different to what we do now.

AK: Is there anything else you want, you really had a burning desire to share or we haven't covered?

FK: No, I think, hopefully I've answered the questions coherently! I think it is an exciting time. I know I joked with you, I feel a little bit like, and I know myself personally, I've been quite slow in the uptake on AI. I go to some conferences and I hear how exciting it is, and people are really, you know, investing and putting things into place. And I feel like some of the more seasoned lawyers that would have struggled getting onto the BlackBerry 20 years ago, 30 years ago, whatever it was. But I'm getting there. And while it's not, I'm not that sort of technically-minded person, I definitely understand that across the profession there will need to be and there is value in utilising it, but not to replace or undervalue what we do as lawyers at any stage.

AK: So for you it is genuinely enabling…

FK: Yes.

AK: …human lawyers to be more effective, but there's a space we need to be ready to occupy that's outside of that.

FK: Yeah.

AK: And some of that we're already doing, some of that's amplifying stuff that we already do. Some of it's new, some of it's going to be new. We don't know what it is yet.

FK: Yeah.

AK: Fleur Katsmartin, thank you so much for joining us.

FK: Thank you.

AK: I've loved talking to you as I always do.

FK: Thanks.

AK: You've been listening to Legal human, with our special guest, Fleur Katsmartin. To hear more Legal human podcasts, subscribe to the channel.

Voiceover: For more insights from Lander & Rogers, visit our website at landers.com.au or connect with us on LinkedIn, Instagram and YouTube.