If you’ve ever had a referral source ask whether you handle Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome and felt your answer was technically true but unsatisfying, you’re in the right place. The path from ‘I can do it’ to ‘I’m the person to call’ is more concrete than it looks.
For mediators who have decided they want to do more of this work and are looking for an honest map of the territory rather than a marketing piece.
The mediator handling Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome-heavy matters needs to know when to pause negotiations and recommend specialist consultation. Some Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome questions exceed what can be productively negotiated without independent expert input; mediators who push past those limits produce agreements that don’t hold up under later scrutiny.
Starting the work
A useful intake habit: ask the client to articulate, in their own words, what they’re hoping the engagement will produce. The answer reveals where the client’s expectations align with what Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome engagements actually deliver and where they don’t. Closing the gap before the engagement starts saves significant friction during the matter.
The right intake length for a Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome matter is usually 60 to 90 minutes, conducted in person or by video. Shorter intakes miss the depth required for the engagement to be properly scoped; longer intakes overwhelm the client. Many practitioners follow up the intake conversation with a written summary the client confirms before the engagement letter is sent.
The body of the engagement
Communication discipline during the middle phase prevents most of the problems that show up at the deliverable. Practitioners who send the client weekly or biweekly written updates — even short ones — maintain trust and surface issues early. Practitioners who go silent during the analytical work leave the client to imagine what might be happening, which is rarely productive.
The middle phase of a Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome engagement is mostly about data gathering, analysis, and coordination. The data gathering involves requesting documents from the client and (often) from third parties through subpoenas or formal requests. The analysis involves working through what the documents reveal. The coordination involves keeping the attorney and other co-professionals informed.
Producing the work product
The deliverable for a Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome engagement is the work product everyone will reference for years afterward. It needs to be defensible (your analysis can withstand scrutiny), readable (the client and any non-specialist can understand it), and complete (it addresses what the engagement was scoped to address). The deliverable usually takes 20-40% of the engagement hours; underestimating this consistently produces matters that run over time.
Walk the client through the deliverable before they take it to the attorney or court. The presentation matters; the same report explained well lands differently than the same report dropped over email without context. The walk-through is also where the client’s last questions surface; addressing them in real time prevents follow-up cycles weeks later. For deeper reference, see ABA Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators.
When the standard doesn’t apply
Pro bono or reduced-fee Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome engagements present a specific risk: the temptation to deliver less rigorous work than the practitioner would for a paying client. Pro bono cases that go wrong because of insufficient analytical rigor damage practitioner reputation more than paying cases that go wrong, because the quality gap is visible.
Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome engagements vary along a few predictable dimensions: client sophistication (institutional client vs. unsophisticated individual), case complexity (single straightforward question vs. multiple intertwined issues), opposing-side cooperation (cooperative vs. adversarial), and timeline pressure (negotiated timeline vs. court-imposed deadlines). Each dimension affects how the standard engagement pattern needs to adjust.
If you’re considering Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome as a focus area and you want one concrete commitment to make: pick the upcoming family-law conference closest to you and commit to attending every year for the next five years.
How VennBoard fits in
VennBoard supports the kind of case-management discipline Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome engagements benefit from: organized case files, integrated communication with co-professionals, deliverable versioning, and the kind of operational consistency that makes the difference between burning out at twenty matters and running a sustainable practice at fifty.
Practitioners interested in seeing VennBoard’s case-management infrastructure for Avoid the Shiny Object Syndrome work can learn more at VennBoard.com.