Corner Office: Francisco D’Souza of Cognizant, on Finding Company Heroes

Q. What were some early lessons for you?

A. I was very fortunate in my upbringing. My father was a diplomat, and so, until I was 18, we traveled to a new country every three years. After finishing high school in the Caribbean, I wound up in Hong Kong when I was 18. We realized that there were few universities that taught in English, and so I went to one in Macau that focused on working professionals. I went to school at night and on weekends.

My days were free, and I got a job as a bank teller. It was a small bank, and they still used a punch-card system. I had taught myself as a teenager how to program. I went to the branch manager and told him he ought to consider new technology. He said: “Fine. Help me figure it out.” We bought a computer. We wrote the software, and I wound up supervising a couple of people when I was 19.

Q. I can imagine that some kids would resent moving to a new country every three years.

A. I was somewhat indifferent to it because I expected it, and I knew nothing else. In hindsight, I wouldn’t do it any other way. It really did shape who I am today.

Q. In what sense?

A. We learned how to love the world. There’s this great richness of diversity, yet people are far more similar than they are different. You’re not as likely to learn that when you grow up in one town, in one environment, in one culture or in one country.

The second thing is that it was an environment of scarcity in many ways, because my parents weren’t particularly affluent. You learn how to find opportunities where they don’t exist and capitalize on them. You have to find ways to make the most of everything, from the littlest things to the biggest.

Q. What are some leadership lessons you’ve learned during your career?

A. We started Cognizant in 1994, and there was a period early on when I personally knew everyone in the company. Now we have 160,000 employees, and there were several personal and rapid transitions over that time.

The lesson I learned is that when you have to evolve that quickly as a person, you need to be aware of two things. One is personal blind spots and the other is personal comfort zones. Those two things can be real gotchas.

It’s very hard to see your blind spots, by definition, and it’s very easy to fall into comfort zones, because people like patterns and a sense of familiarity. I’ve tried consciously to say, “What are the tools I can use to identify these blind spots and push through comfort zones?” And I always tell myself that if I wake up in the morning and feel comfortable, I’m probably not pushing myself hard enough.

Q. And what are the tools to help you see your blind spots?

A. One is just talking to other leaders. The conversations with them help me because they are, in a sense, a mirror — I can assess what I think they’re doing well, and where I think their blind spots are. It’s easier to see someone else’s blind spots than it is to see your own, of course, and you can use that to reflect on what your own blind spots are.

I also learned a lot from the people who work for me. Before I took over as C.E.O. in 2007, the board gave me the benefit of some time. I worked with a coach for a while, and he talked to about 20 people who worked for me, above me and around me, and to my board. It was difficult feedback, but very enlightening. That helped me identify a couple of my blind spots.

Q. Can you share one?

A. There was a lot of feedback from my team that people had confidence in my ability, but they also said that when I criticize something they’ve done, the weight of that is very pronounced and significant. It made me understand that the weight of my words was a lot heavier than I gave myself credit for, and it led me to be much more thoughtful and measured in how I give feedback.

Q. What’s unusual about your culture?

A. We’ve organized the company in a way to make sure that we continuously delegate and empower people on the front lines. As we got bigger, we would take larger units and break them down into smaller units and give individuals a sense of ownership, creating very clear success metrics around those individuals.

But when you decentralize and empower, you have to make sure you don’t wind up with lots of microcultures, because every leader, every manager, puts his or her stamp on the culture. Culture gets passed along not by writing it down, but through the rituals you have in the organization, the legends you refer to, and the heroes of the organization. So we institutionalized a set of things to create rituals, heroes and legends.

For example, we have a tradition of naming the associate of the year — we use a process in each region to find the single associate who contributed well above and beyond and, through his or her actions, exhibited the traits of the culture that we thought were important. We similarly institutionalized a ritual that we called the project of the year. And we rent stadiums around the world and bring all the employees and their families for a celebration, with entertainment and awards.

Q. How do you hire?

A. I’m looking for passion. The person I’m hiring needs to have passion for what they’re doing, and they need to understand where that passion comes from. They need to be in touch with that. You need to know what drives you.

And you need somebody who’s got just raw smarts and talent and an innate ability to learn. Because the thing about functional expertise is that unless you’re in some very specific area, almost everything that we need to do our job becomes obsolete quickly, and the half-life of knowledge is becoming shorter and shorter. So do you have the personal agility to continuously renew those skills, to reinvent yourself?

For 80-Year-Old San Francisco Firm, IP Is a Family Tradition

Gregory Owen, Melville Owen and Noel Cook of Owen, Wickersham & Erickson
Image: Jason Doiy/The Recorder

A portrait of a man wearing thick, black glasses and a half-smile hangs beside an ornate grandfather clock that belonged to him and his father, ticking steadily.

A. Donham Owen gave up his patent practice shortly before his death four decades ago. But the firm he started in 1933 lives on with his son and grandson, who display his heirlooms in the lobby of San Francisco's Owen, Wickersham & Erickson.

Through three generations, the intrigue of intellectual property work -- and the satisfaction of practicing in their own small shop -- has never faded for the men of the Owen family.

"A lot of lawyers burn out early," said A. Donham's son, Melville, 80, who was at the helm for nearly a half-century before passing control of the firm to his son, Gregory. "But with trademarks, you are dealing with something new and protecting it and watching it grow."

Owen, Wickersham & Erickson has become something of an anachronism. The corps of classic San Francisco firms with which it emerged have gone global or extinct, with few exceptions. Yet as it celebrates its 80th anniversary, the nine-lawyer shop carries on, serving a mix of startups and Fortune 500 clients and regularly rejecting merger overtures from large national firms looking to plant a flag in San Francisco.

Its survival, coupled with its heritage, sets it apart. Although there have been a number of prominent examples of family-owned firms in the Bay Area -- including the Law Offices of Joseph L. Alioto and Angela Alioto and Hersh & Hersh -- IP lawyers are hard-pressed to name another clan like the Owens in their space.

There are lineages to be found in the histories of several native San Francisco firms, such as the Sutros of what was then Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro or the Townsends of the firm formerly known as Townsend and Townsend and Crew. But the anti-nepotism rules that became popular later in the 20th century have cut some of those family trees short. Lawrence Townsend, counsel at Owens, Wickersham & Erickson, is a fourth-generation IP specialist, but he could not join his family's firm, Townsend and Townsend and Crew. His office, like Gregory "Greg" Owen's, is furnished with his grandfather's desk.

The Owens have practiced IP law since before the term was coined, Greg noted, and their firm brought one of the field's defining cases. In 1980 name partner Robert Wickersham argued Diamond v. Diehr before the U.S. Supreme Court, winning a 5-4 ruling holding that a machine controlled by a computer program could be patented. The ruling is often cited in modern-day cases before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court as justices wrestle over what is patentable, said Michael Jacobs, co-founder of Morrison & Foerster's intellectual property practice group.

As Edward Reines, an IP partner at Weil, Gotshal & Manges, puts it: "Their firm was at the forefront of patent litigation before everybody got involved in patent litigation."

Subscribe to The Recorder

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Sign In or Subscribe
">

For 80-Year-Old San Francisco Firm, IP Is a Family Tradition

Gregory Owen, Melville Owen and Noel Cook of Owen, Wickersham & Erickson
Image: Jason Doiy/The Recorder

A portrait of a man wearing thick, black glasses and a half-smile hangs beside an ornate grandfather clock that belonged to him and his father, ticking steadily.

A. Donham Owen gave up his patent practice shortly before his death four decades ago. But the firm he started in 1933 lives on with his son and grandson, who display his heirlooms in the lobby of San Francisco's Owen, Wickersham & Erickson.

Through three generations, the intrigue of intellectual property work -- and the satisfaction of practicing in their own small shop -- has never faded for the men of the Owen family.

"A lot of lawyers burn out early," said A. Donham's son, Melville, 80, who was at the helm for nearly a half-century before passing control of the firm to his son, Gregory. "But with trademarks, you are dealing with something new and protecting it and watching it grow."

Owen, Wickersham & Erickson has become something of an anachronism. The corps of classic San Francisco firms with which it emerged have gone global or extinct, with few exceptions. Yet as it celebrates its 80th anniversary, the nine-lawyer shop carries on, serving a mix of startups and Fortune 500 clients and regularly rejecting merger overtures from large national firms looking to plant a flag in San Francisco.

Its survival, coupled with its heritage, sets it apart. Although there have been a number of prominent examples of family-owned firms in the Bay Area -- including the Law Offices of Joseph L. Alioto and Angela Alioto and Hersh & Hersh -- IP lawyers are hard-pressed to name another clan like the Owens in their space.

There are lineages to be found in the histories of several native San Francisco firms, such as the Sutros of what was then Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro or the Townsends of the firm formerly known as Townsend and Townsend and Crew. But the anti-nepotism rules that became popular later in the 20th century have cut some of those family trees short. Lawrence Townsend, counsel at Owens, Wickersham & Erickson, is a fourth-generation IP specialist, but he could not join his family's firm, Townsend and Townsend and Crew. His office, like Gregory "Greg" Owen's, is furnished with his grandfather's desk.

The Owens have practiced IP law since before the term was coined, Greg noted, and their firm brought one of the field's defining cases. In 1980 name partner Robert Wickersham argued Diamond v. Diehr before the U.S. Supreme Court, winning a 5-4 ruling holding that a machine controlled by a computer program could be patented. The ruling is often cited in modern-day cases before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court as justices wrestle over what is patentable, said Michael Jacobs, co-founder of Morrison & Foerster's intellectual property practice group.

As Edward Reines, an IP partner at Weil, Gotshal & Manges, puts it: "Their firm was at the forefront of patent litigation before everybody got involved in patent litigation."

Subscribe to The Recorder

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Sign In or Subscribe
">

For 80-Year-Old San Francisco Firm, IP Is a Family Tradition

Gregory Owen, Melville Owen and Noel Cook of Owen, Wickersham & Erickson
Image: Jason Doiy/The Recorder

A portrait of a man wearing thick, black glasses and a half-smile hangs beside an ornate grandfather clock that belonged to him and his father, ticking steadily.

A. Donham Owen gave up his patent practice shortly before his death four decades ago. But the firm he started in 1933 lives on with his son and grandson, who display his heirlooms in the lobby of San Francisco's Owen, Wickersham & Erickson.

Through three generations, the intrigue of intellectual property work -- and the satisfaction of practicing in their own small shop -- has never faded for the men of the Owen family.

"A lot of lawyers burn out early," said A. Donham's son, Melville, 80, who was at the helm for nearly a half-century before passing control of the firm to his son, Gregory. "But with trademarks, you are dealing with something new and protecting it and watching it grow."

Owen, Wickersham & Erickson has become something of an anachronism. The corps of classic San Francisco firms with which it emerged have gone global or extinct, with few exceptions. Yet as it celebrates its 80th anniversary, the nine-lawyer shop carries on, serving a mix of startups and Fortune 500 clients and regularly rejecting merger overtures from large national firms looking to plant a flag in San Francisco.

Its survival, coupled with its heritage, sets it apart. Although there have been a number of prominent examples of family-owned firms in the Bay Area -- including the Law Offices of Joseph L. Alioto and Angela Alioto and Hersh & Hersh -- IP lawyers are hard-pressed to name another clan like the Owens in their space.

There are lineages to be found in the histories of several native San Francisco firms, such as the Sutros of what was then Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro or the Townsends of the firm formerly known as Townsend and Townsend and Crew. But the anti-nepotism rules that became popular later in the 20th century have cut some of those family trees short. Lawrence Townsend, counsel at Owens, Wickersham & Erickson, is a fourth-generation IP specialist, but he could not join his family's firm, Townsend and Townsend and Crew. His office, like Gregory "Greg" Owen's, is furnished with his grandfather's desk.

The Owens have practiced IP law since before the term was coined, Greg noted, and their firm brought one of the field's defining cases. In 1980 name partner Robert Wickersham argued Diamond v. Diehr before the U.S. Supreme Court, winning a 5-4 ruling holding that a machine controlled by a computer program could be patented. The ruling is often cited in modern-day cases before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court as justices wrestle over what is patentable, said Michael Jacobs, co-founder of Morrison & Foerster's intellectual property practice group.

As Edward Reines, an IP partner at Weil, Gotshal & Manges, puts it: "Their firm was at the forefront of patent litigation before everybody got involved in patent litigation."

Subscribe to The Recorder

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Sign In or Subscribe
">

San Francisco Judges OK Pay Bump for Unionized Employees

credit: Photographer's Choice RF/Art Grafts

Trial court judges voted to ratify a labor deal that will give most unionized court employees in San Francisco a 3 percent pay increase and a one-time $3,500 bonus. That will cost the court $4.7 million, but court officials say that's completely offset by a reduction in the amount they'll be required to contribute for pension and health care plans.

The new contracts represent a reversal of fortunes, both for the unions and the court. Earlier this year, the court proposed, and then unilaterally imposed, a 5 percent cut on some unionized employees. And last year, San Francisco had to go to the Judicial Council and plead for an emergency loan as it sought to bring its costs in line with cuts to its budget.

Court executive officer T. Michael Yuen said that after making painful cuts, including eliminating 11 commissioner positions and closing six courtrooms, San Francisco has steadied its finances and can afford the bonuses. It paid back the loan this summer. And this year the governor included a provision requiring local courts to surrender unspent reserves.

Still, the raises could become a headache for Yuen and the local judges. Last year, some on the Judicial Council said San Francisco was to blame for its budget shortfalls and suggested its employees were overpaid.

Councilman David De Alba, a Sacramento County Superior Court judge, said Wednesday that it will "not go unnoticed" that San Francisco Superior Court has money to spend on wage hikes while many other county courts "barely have enough money to keep doors open."

Steve Stallone, a spokesman for employees represented by the Service Employees International Union, said Tuesday's ratification was expected. But he disputed the notion that court officials had won reductions in pension contributions, saying those adjustments were required by law and not a part of the negotiations.

The new contract is effective as of November 13 for SEIU members. The contract with the other three unions, including the court reporters' union and a managers' union, will go into effect early next year. A court official said the $3,500 bonuses will be paid out early next year as well.

Summer Hiring Reflects Sluggish Demand at Most San Francisco Bay Area Firms

There seems to be no end to bad financial news for law firms: Demand is flat, revenue growth is expected to fall short of last year's small gains, billable hours and realization rates are down and costs are rising.

And judging from law firms' recruitment for their 2013 summer class, no one is expecting the landscape to change dramatically anytime soon. An informal survey of 11 Am Law 200 firms conducted by The Recorder found that the appetite for summer associates has shrunk by nearly 40 percent from 2007. For law students, the good news is that recruitment seems to have stabilized. The good news for firms is that with smaller class sizes, it's much easier than in the boom days to get the pick of the litter.

Most of the firms will welcome Bay Area summer classes next year of about the same size as in 2012.

But several firms did diverge from last year's precedent. An above-average acceptance rate yielded an abnormally large 2012 class of 43 summer associates in the region for Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, law school recruiting manager Stacy Trzesniewski said. The firm's Bay Area class for the coming summer will be about half that size.

Jones Day, meanwhile, is doubling down. To power its plans for expansion in California, the firm hired 44 percent more summer associates than last year in the Bay Area, said Robert Mittelstaedt, partner in charge of the San Francisco office. As many of its competitors are retrenching, the firm sees a chance to claim a greater share of the talent pool, Mittelstaedt said.

"We think we will grow in the future as much as we have in the past, and we want to be ready for it," he said. "We have a hard time passing up good talent."

Yet even a firm set on growth like Jones Day is hiring far fewer summer associates than it did before the recession. And most firms have slashed their recruitment further. Among the 11 firms surveyed, summer hiring has fallen by 38 percent on average from 2007 to 2013, which is consistent with nationwide statistics.

And for some firms, the decline was even steeper. Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman will have seven associates in its Bay Area offices in 2013, less than a third of the 25 it recruited for summer 2007. Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe will have 17 summer associates in the region in 2013, a 59 percent decline from the 41 it brought on board for 2007.

Anemic recruiting was among the factors that led the National Association for Law Placement to deem 2011 the worst entry-level job market in more than 30 years. Although it is too soon to produce statistics for fall 2012, NALP executive director James Leipold said he expects the volume of hiring done by firms to be "flat to a slight uptick" compared to last year.

Powered by demand for legal services in Silicon Valley, the Bay Area appears to be marginally outperforming other markets, Leipold noted. Career development officials at UC-Hastings, UC-Berkeley, UC-Davis and Santa Clara University said they saw a slight uptick in the number of employers who came to campus for formal recruitment.

Subscribe to The Recorder

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Sign In or Subscribe
">

Mintz Levin Tries New Recipe in San Francisco Bay Area

Paul Churchill, former head of Goodwin Procter's San Francisco office, has joined Boston-based Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo to manage its San Francisco office.

He's joined by litigator Evan Nadel, a former partner in Greenberg Traurig's San Francisco office.

Churchill, a real estate attorney, set up Goodwin's San Francisco office in 2006 and helped the office grow to 28 attorneys. Now he said he's looking forward to doing the same for Mintz Levin, where he officially started his new job Monday.

"I've done this before and I know what it takes," Churchill said. "I expect to have challenges just like any new entry to the market would, but I already have all the support I need from day one."

Like Goodwin, Mintz Levin made a big push in California starting in 2006, opening offices in both Palo Alto and San Diego. But while the San Diego office has since grown to more than 30 attorneys, the firm's office at 5 Palo Alto Square, which focused on patent prosecution work, never gained traction. At its peak, the office had about 15 lawyers, but only a few remained by March of this year.

In April, those attorneys relocated to the firm's newly opened San Francisco office, where Mintz Levin is hoping to have better luck. The San Francisco office will service the firm's roster of life science and tech clients based in South San Francisco, said New York-based Mintz Levin managing partner Robert Bodian. And it will focus on practices like litigation, real estate and employment, as opposed to patent work.

Bodian said he expects that within a few years, the San Francisco office will be as large as the firm's San Diego office, if not bigger.

"San Francisco is an attractive place for firms to be, and there are advantages to being there, especially if you have a strong litigation practice," Bodian said. "But I wouldn't rule out being back in Silicon Valley, depending on how we grow and what practices we attract."

Before joining Goodwin in 2006, Churchill spent 12 years at Cooley, where he headed the firm's real estate group. Some of his clients have included Menlo Equities, Juniper Networks Inc., Misawa Homes of America Inc., Digital Realty Trust Inc. and Woodside Hotels.

Commercial litigator Nadel began his legal career in 1998 at what was then O'Sullivan Graev & Karabell, and then moved to what was then Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin in 2000. He joined Squire Sanders & Dempsey in 2006 and departed for Greenberg Traurig in 2010. Recruiter Larry Watanabe of Watanabe Nason brokered Churchill's move.