Skip to content
Law Society of Scotland
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
  • For members

    • For members

    • CPD & Training

    • Membership and fees

    • Rules and guidance

    • Regulation and compliance

    • Journal

    • Business support

    • Career growth

    • Member benefits

    • Professional support

    • Lawscot Wellbeing

    • Lawscot Sustainability

  • News and events

    • News and events

    • Law Society news

    • Blogs & opinions

    • CPD & Training

    • Events

  • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying as a Scottish solicitor

    • Career support and advice

    • Our work with schools

    • Lawscot Foundation

    • Funding your education

    • Social mobility

  • Research and policy

    • Research and policy

    • Research

    • Influencing the law and policy

    • Equality and diversity

    • Our international work

    • Legal Services Review

    • Meet the Policy team

  • For the public

    • For the public

    • What solicitors can do for you

    • Making a complaint

    • Client protection

    • Find a Solicitor

    • Frequently asked questions

    • Your Scottish solicitor

  • About us

    • About us

    • Contact us

    • Who we are

    • Our strategy, reports and plans

    • Help and advice

    • Our standards

    • Work with us

    • Our logo and branding

    • Equality and diversity

  1. Home
  2. For members
  3. Journal Archive
  4. Issues
  5. April 2021
  6. The Eternal Optimist: To call or not to call?

The Eternal Optimist: To call or not to call?

Why do many lawyers duck making phone calls, when they are often the best means of communication?
19th April 2021 | Stephen Vallance

On the second Tuesday of every month I catch up at 8am with a group of lawyers to share our thoughts and questions on what is happening in the legal world. Over lockdown it has proven to be a great support mechanism and a source of insight into the wider legal marketplace. This piece arose as a direct result of one of our recent conversations.

Orange rotary phoneThe legal market for many remains particularly busy. Practitioners’ time is limited and the demands of the public increase constantly. Worse still, there are differences in communication preferences and platforms which further add to the challenges. By preferences I’m referring to whether it should be verbal or written communications and the tendency both with clients and solicitors to avoid telephone calls, thinking it is perhaps quicker for the practitioner or easier for the client. Platforms are even more challenging, with the myriad different ways that people can now communicate, so how do you ensure that messages aren’t missed?

There are available a multitude of software based solutions that can help. Systems that can gather together all the communications from different platforms and channel them into one “feed”, programs that can keep in touch with clients automatically, and apps that can schedule meetings and emails. All have merit and a place in a busy growing legal office. The view of the breakfast group, though, seemed to be fairly unanimous on one piece of technology, with some interesting insights into its benefits and why it isn’t used more.

Why call?

Pick up the phone! Generally a call, although it may take a little longer, saves time in the long run. Only a very small percentage of information is passed through the written word: so much more through tone, intonation etc. Likewise, not everyone’s proficiency with language is the same. How many disagreements have I had with my wife simply because we each had a different understanding of what “I’ll make dinner” meant? A conversation will help cut to the core of the issues, maximise the chance of understanding being achieved and minimise the need for further communications.

So, why do we still hesitate to do so? The answers are many and varied, but I suspect are seldom to do with time management. Many, dare I say younger, clients just don’t do telephone calls; it’s not their favoured medium. With them there may be nothing we can do except adapt to the newer technologies mentioned above. For most clients, though, telephone is perfectly acceptable and it is we who resist it. I suspect for many it’s through fear, or at least discomfort. Perhaps we dislike confrontation, or worry that we might not be able to answer a query. Most practitioners at some level will enjoy even the limited time that an email gives to research or consider a point and to frame a proper response. Likewise, some of us will feel emails allow us a protective barrier between ourselves and a challenging client.

My own experience, for what it is worth, is that anything more challenging than a confirmation email is better dealt with face to face, or over the phone. Issues avoided or delayed only ever get worse, and many can be prevented by good early direct communication. So, invest in the great systems that make routine communications easier, but ask yourself, wouldn’t a call be better?

Oh, and if you would like to join us on a Tuesday morning, drop me an email.

 

Get in touch

If any of the topics that I cover resonate with you or there is a particular issue that you’d like raised, please contact me at stephen.vallance@hmconnect.co.uk

The Author

Stephen Vallance works with HM Connect, the referral and support network operated by Harper Macleod

Share this article
Add To Favorites
https://lawware.co.uk/

Regulars

  • People on the move: April 2021
  • Book reviews: April 2021
  • Reading for pleasure: April 2021

Perspectives

  • Opinion: Richard Henderson
  • President's column: April 2021
  • Editorial: April 2021
  • Viewpoints: April 2021
  • Profile: Lynsey Walker

Features

  • Uber: more journeys to come
  • Enforcing IP in the digital age
  • Pre-nups: questions of protection
  • Conference boat comes in
  • Out of the mouths of babes
  • FFI: the future for family business lawyers

Briefings

  • Criminal court: Of dockets, and much more
  • Licensing: A justiciable freedom?
  • Planning: Development at pace
  • Insolvency: Solicitor debts: sue the judicial factor?
  • Tax: Budget briefing
  • Immigration: When human rights meet national security
  • Scottish Solicitors' Discipline Tribunal
  • When the “twa kingdoms” collide
  • In-house: People-centred, remotely

In practice

  • Talent spotting: raising the bar
  • COVID and the march of time
  • Price transparency: help, not hindrance
  • The Word of Gold: Only connect
  • The Eternal Optimist: To call or not to call?
  • Working with OPG
  • Ask Ash: Terror of the Zoom chat

Online exclusive

  • Being faith-friendly: an employer's guide to Ramadhan
  • Tackling offending: not “soft” or “hard”, but “smart”
  • Balance of blame: some factors in play
  • Beyond COVID: what next for the courts?
  • Diversity, traineeships and legal practice

In this issue

  • How Thorntons complete client ID/verification in minutes
  • What the best law firms do...
  • Clio announces Series E funding

Recent Issues

Dec 2023
Nov 2023
Oct 2023
Sept 2023
Search the archive

Additional

Law Society of Scotland
Atria One, 144 Morrison Street
Edinburgh
EH3 8EX
If you’re looking for a solicitor, visit FindaSolicitor.scot
T: +44(0) 131 226 7411
E: lawscot@lawscot.org.uk
About us
  • Contact us
  • Who we are
  • Strategy reports plans
  • Help and advice
  • Our standards
  • Work with us
Useful links
  • Find a Solicitor
  • Sign in
  • CPD & Training
  • Rules and guidance
  • Website terms and conditions
Law Society of Scotland | © 2025
Made by Gecko Agency Limited