By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: It’s an implicit mistake that lawyers can sometimes make. They’ll tacitly believe and behave as though, “Reasonable people think like I do.” The trouble is, that isn’t true. Other lawyers think like you do, but lawyers have been selected and trained to favor high-analytical ability. We simply can’t project that on society. […]
Don’t Take Analytical Thinking for Granted Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: These days, instead of spending our days in offices, conference rooms, and courthouses, we are likely spending those days in front of laptop web-cameras, negotiating our business lives in this new medium. I have noticed that even some contacts that used to be handled by telephone, are now becoming web-conferences.
Web-Conferencing? Don’t Let Your Energy Zoom Away Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: The art of training legal advocates has a long and honorable history. For example, the Socratic method used in law school is still an unbeatable way to teach critical thinking. But what about trial advocacy? On that score, many programs like NITA and some of our firm’s in-house programs have
Use B.A.T.A. to Get Better Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: Both theory and experience say that there are two kinds of thinking. One is focused thinking, zeroing in on a topic, analytically and systematically. The other is diffuse thinking, abstract and constrained only by association or whim. If focused thinking marches across the terrain with destination and purpose, then diffuse
Focus on the Focused, but also Deal with the Diffuse Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: There is a persistent belief among many mock jurors that I have seen in certain kinds of cases. The belief is that liability attaches automatically to possession, and jurors usually express it through the lens of home ownership. As one individual shared at a mock trial last week, “It is
Address the ‘My House, My Responsibility’ Analogy Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: Trial lawyers understand the need to refine and to help fit the main point of their case into the smallest possible container. In complex litigation, however, that quest for a bottom line can be elusive. You might have your one-line theme, and as much as that single expression can help
Know Your Trial Message Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: In the real world, disputes are often settled by someone with more or better knowledge, or at least someone claiming to have more or better knowledge. The courtroom, however, is different. It is a setting that is designed to ensure equality of knowledge. When it comes to the information that
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: Speaking for most of us in the field of specialists who advise on jury selection, we like to say that “demographics are the least useful” of the factors that you might consider when you are evaluating a venire panel. Their experiences and their attitudes are critical, providing a foundation for
Expect Greater Blame from Older Americans Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: So the case is complex. Maybe it involves a tricky multi-stage legal question. Or maybe it requires understanding some arcane point on patents. Or perhaps it requires grappling with the workings of an unfamiliar technology. In these cases, is the jury up to the task? It can be tempting to
Don’t Fret, Your Jury Can Handle Some Complexity Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm: It is one of the basics emphasized in your first public speaking class: Have a clear transition between your main points. But it is also a rule that many experienced communicators set aside or start taking for granted. As you become more comfortable with your content and your audience, you can fall victim
Think About Transitions Read More »