"I attribute the fact that I've been able to continue to practice for this long to being a writer and a speaker..."

Jenner & Block’s Steve Siros cut his legal writing teeth on law review articles more than 30 years ago. But don’t expect his work today to contain lengthy analyses of arcane legal issues: “Nobody has time to read ten pages. I might print out a ten-page article and say I'll read it on a train, but probably not. In this day and age, your written work has to be short, pithy, and punchy.”

We spoke with Steve about thought leadership, credibility, and how he became one of JD Supra’s most-read authors in Environmental law.

Why do you write?

I started writing law review articles that took a long time to write and a longer time to publish. Now, things happen more quickly when content relevant to my clients appears online almost immediately after news is announced, say about a new rule or decision from the EPA. But these stories – probably written by bots – don't have any analysis of the developments, and they don't provide guidance that can help my audience respond to those changes.

"...making sure that I give short, targeted, and practical advice is, I think, critical."

I try to place myself in the middle, with the focused thought leadership my clients need to understand regulatory developments. I explain why it’s important to them, the potential ramifications of the new rules, and how it’s going to affect their business. Of course, it needs to be timely, published within, say, 48 hours of the new rule; after that, people lose interest and move on to the next issue. But it has to be useful, with a unique perspective on the issue, not just a recitation of facts.

What am I trying to do? I’m trying to get work. And so making sure that I give short, targeted, and practical advice is, I think, critical.

Environmental law is a unique area in that it really is a specialty practice that evolves over time. And if you're not continuing to evolve with it, if you're not keeping abreast of what is happening, you're not going to be a successful environmental lawyer. I attribute the fact that I've been able to continue to practice for this long to being a writer and a speaker.

And if I'm spending time understanding the issues, I might as well write about them. It lets me leverage the work that I’m already doing and tell people that I know what I’m talking about.

How do you pick your topics?

I try to focus on a particular area that is currently relevant to my practice because, number one, it helps me stay abreast of what's happening in that area. And two, I'd like to generate potential business in that area because it's already stuff that I'm doing and working on.

In the environmental practice, you've got to find a topic and become the subject matter expert on it. For me, that’s emerging contaminants. In the beginning, it was MTBE, then I started working on 1,4-dioxane issues. Right now, what’s most important to my clients is the emerging regulation of PFAS (ed. Note: Per- And Polyfluoroalkyl Substances).

"Once you have carved out a particular niche and demonstrated subject matter expertise, you can move to the top of your client’s speed dial..."

So my written work looks at what’s happening in that arena and explains the issues. I look at new PFAS lawsuits and what they might mean for my clients. I read press releases and blogs from NGOs and other organizations that publish lists of products that they have found to have PFAS in them because they're going to generate even more litigation. I follow developments at the EPA, like the proposed drinking water standards for a handful of PFAS. We may not know what the final standards will be but we know that there will final standards and clients need to understand the potential impact of those standards on their business. Those are the types of things I tend to write about because my clients need insight and guidance on those topics.

What’s your writing process?

I typically write in the morning – I get into the office really, really early – before the phone starts to ring. When something happens the day before, I'll spend a couple of hours looking at the issues, researching, and digging into the details.

It’s critical to do your homework on these things – going through the Federal Register, the agency action, or the court decision, for example – so that you fully understand the issues before you start writing. If you miss something or your analysis is wrong, you lose a lot of credibility.

Who are your targets, and how do you know when they’re reading your work?

I'm targeting the companies and corporations that are going to face potential liability for PFAS issues. I want to be in a position where I identify and flag issues and say, look, we've got creative solutions to deal with and address them. The EPA did X, Y, and Z, and here's why it’s got implications for this particular industry or set of companies. These are the things you should be thinking about. And by the way, call me to think about them more.

"I do get calls from clients [and potential clients] who tell me that an article was interesting and that they’d like to talk to me..."

For readers, I look at the analytics that JD Supra sends us. They’re a great tool that we didn’t have ten years ago. You can see whose attention you’re attracting: manufacturing companies, insurance companies, regulators – I’m always amused when I see that a lot of the regulators are reading my work – and that validates that I'm writing about the right things. If I wrote and didn't see anybody reading it, I would reevaluate or reassess what I'm doing.

But when I see that I write something and I'm getting manufacturers, insurers, and regulators looking at it, then I know I'm doing something that's of interest and relevant.

How has writing supported your business growth?

Writing enhances my credibility. I keep coming back to that idea of credibility, but it’s so important: clients can choose between hundreds of lawyers. If a company has an issue, anybody can say that they know about that stuff. But when clients can Google a lawyer’s name and find out that they’ve written about that issue 50 times, I guess they are the one who knows about it. I think that gives you a certain credibility in the space.

I do get calls from clients [and potential clients] who tell me that an article was interesting and that they’d like to talk to me about it. I also get calls from conferences and things like that that lead to speaking opportunities that I might not have ordinarily.

Once you have carved out a particular niche and demonstrated subject matter expertise, you can move to the top of your client’s speed dial (or in this day in age, email or instant message list) when the issue that you have highlighted as a risk crosses their desk.

More broadly – and beyond your recognition as Top Author in 2023 on JD Supra – has your content been successful?

I know we're all a bit narcissistic when we look at likes we get on LinkedIn, but I will look at how one article generates a lot of interest while another does not. And then I try to understand why that one was different. I think I measure success by whether an article got a broad spectrum of people interested enough to look at it. It's iterative and builds over time. I mean, if nobody clicks on it, then I'm wasting my time.

We probably get – every day – 50 or 60 developments in the environmental world that could be important for my clients, so I try to spend my time figuring out what's going to be relevant so I can write about that.

For example, the EPA is thinking about listing certain PFOS as hazardous substances under CERCLA. As soon as that was announced, there were maybe 200 articles posted in like ten seconds. But very few of them discussed what that meant or how to mitigate that risk. I wrote on it with one of my associates – we took a little more time to sort through all of the issues – in an article that provided creative, out-of-the-box thinking on how to deal with the planned new rule. I got calls from a couple of attorneys in other firms who told me that they found the article interesting as they thought through those issues.

What advice do you have for lawyers who aspire to become thought leaders through content?

You need to be nimble: your work has to be fast, it has to be short, and it has to be good. That’s a narrow window, but if you can’t do that, go on to the next thing and don’t waste your time.

"Don’t bury the lede."

Don't be long-winded. Don’t bury the lede. If people can’t quickly scan through something within, say, a minute, they’re not going to read it. Nobody has time to read ten pages. I might print out a ten-page article and say I'll read it on a train, but probably not. In this day and age, your written work has to be short, pithy, and punchy.

And distinguish yourself with content that shows how you can help a client with a creative solution to an issue because that's what they're going to pay you for.

[The latest in a series of Q&A discussions on successful thought leadership with recipients of JD Supra's 2023 Readers' Choice awards. Read additional profiles here.]