General Counsel of Cottage Health

00:51:58

Subscribe and listen on…

Apple Podcasts | Stitcher | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Amazon Music | PocketCasts | iHeartRadio | Player.FM Podcasts

Watch Full Interview | View Show Notes | View Transcript

Stacy Bratcher, General Counsel of Cottage Health, in conversation with host M.C. Sungaila, shares her journey to in-house leadership and dives into the role of bar associations in shaping professional connections, skills development, and career advancement. She also discusses the pivotal role played by general counsel in organizations. Tune in to be inspired.

Relevant episode links:

Cottage Health, Women Lawyers Association Los Angeles, Caryn Schenewerk - Previous Episode, Song of Solomon, In Cold Blood

About Stacy Bratcher:

Stacy Bratcher is Vice President and General Counsel of Cottage Health, the largest health system in the Central Coast of California. In this role, she oversees the Office of General Counsel, Compliance, Internal Audit, and Government Relations.

Prior to joining Cottage Health, she served for 15 years at the University of Southern California, a top 20 private research institution, rising to Managing General Counsel of the university and Corporate Secretary of Keck Medicine of USC. Recruited for her healthcare law expertise as the university was forming its medical enterprise, she helped navigate Keck Medicine from inception to its #16 ranking on the Honor Roll of U.S. News and World Report.

During her in-house legal career, she spearheaded legal response to crisis matters, including several federal investigations, #metoo lawsuits and class action litigation, coordinating incident response with public relations, insurance carriers, rating agencies and the board.

She also served for 14 years as a Commissioner for the Los Angeles County Hospitals and Health Care Delivery Commission, advising the Board of Supervisors on the operation of its public hospital system and was member of the Board of Governors of the Women Lawyers’ Association of Los Angeles. In addition to her work at Cottage Health, she is a trustee of the California Self Insured Security Fund, an $800M workers compensation insolvency fund supporting major employers in California.

Stacy received her J.D., cum laude, with a certificate in health law from St. Louis University School of Law, and her B.A. in English from Truman State University. She is an occasional speaker on legal topics impacting health care providers and recently presented at Becker’s Healthcare Annual Meeting, the American Health Law Association, and the Healthcare Law and Compliance Institute.

I'm very pleased to have joined me on the show to share her story and her adventure in the law, Stacy Bratcher, who is the Vice President and General Counsel at Cottage Health. Stacy, welcome.

Thanks so much, MC. I'm happy to be here.

I'm so glad to have you. We have a shared history and work with the Women Lawyers Association Los Angeles. It's great to have the opportunity to be able to catch up with you on your work as a general counsel, and for you to share some of those experiences with those who might be interested at some point in their careers in going in-house and advancing to the general counsel level. Even those law students who are scratching their heads and saying, "What the heck does a general counsel do? Why might I want to do that?" There's a whole variety of folks who read this. Anyone could be in either of those categories. I wanted to start first with a universal question. What brought you to the law? How is it that you decided to go to law school to begin with?

I have an interview answer and then a real answer.

You can give either both or whichever one you want, but we're an authentic show.

We have that as a shared value. The real answer was that when I was a little kid, we had the Game of Life. I don't know if you remember that board game. Part of the Game of Life was that you would take your little car and move around the board. They had different career spots on there. They also had an annual salary for each career. I remember the doctor was the highest one. That was $100,000, but I didn't like blood, touching people, or anything like that. That was out.

The next one was a lawyer. Lawyers made $70,000. I was like, "That's where I'm going." That's a quirky answer, but that was where I first got the idea. Neither of my parents were lawyers. My dad didn't finish college. My mom went to night school to become an architect while she was raising us. I didn't have experience with legal professionals.

When I was in college, I did an internship in the governor's office in the State of Missouri, where I'm from. That was a great experience for many reasons, but while I was working there in public policy matters, I looked around, and pretty much everyone had a Law degree. The governor was a lawyer. Half of his team had Law degrees, even the elected senators and representatives and the lobbyist. I was 22 at that time. I look young now, but I looked young back then. I thought, "The way the world works is run by lawyers. If I'm going to get anywhere, that's the best place for me to get this experience and knowledge." That's a combo. It was planted at an early time and then reinforced as I got older.

That's an evolution that makes sense. If you don't have anyone who's in that particular career, it would never have come to mind, to begin with. I have a similar story growing up of saying, "You are going to have to put the roof over your head, make your living, and not depend on someone else to do that. What's a good way to do that?" Being a poet, in my case, probably wasn't the way to go. I have to look outside that for some other options.

The second part about seeing observing that there is a lot of legal training in the public policy area in particular shows once again the number of ways that you can use a Law degree and legal training in critical thinking and analysis, particularly with different kinds of policies. We have had Caryn Schenewerk, who was the Head of Policy for SpaceX and Relativity. She was on the show previously. That's space frontier law stuff, but it's policy work.

You need to have that legal training to talk with the legislators and the regulators and figure out what's going on. That was very observant. You were like, "This would be helpful if I want to do this kind of work." You had that experience in a policy political realm. Is that what you thought you would do with your Law degree when you went to law school? Did you think, "I can go back into policy work," or were you not having a particular idea in mind?

I did not have a destination. I thought I would go back. They say you have your first love, and my first love was that role. It was everything that you talk about at the dinner table. At 22, I was in the room where we were talking about abortion, gay rights, guns, taxes, and all these sorts of things. However, the truth of it, and I hope this is different for folks coming up behind me, is that law school was super expensive.

My parents didn't have a huge college fund for me. I was lucky enough to come out of college without student loans, but I did have to borrow the whole tuition for my law school experience and my living expenses. I came out with what now is a very modest amount, but at that time was more money than I had ever heard about. Government jobs don't pay anything. Full disclosure, as a policy assistant, I was making $9 an hour. This was in 1996. I probably would have made $40,000 or $50,000 at that time if I came out and gone back into a policy role in government. That wasn't going to be feasible.

I'm sure other guests have talked about this. The other thing is that it felt a lot at the time that the law school training was pushing you into a law firm as your destination. There wasn't a lot of encouragement or opportunity. They talked about public interest law, but they didn't talk about alternate careers or in-house counsel, for example, as a path. Without having that framework of what you can do with a Law degree, people are telling you that this is where you're going and then having a big debt burden, it unfolded that way. When I got into the law firm, it was a little bit of pulling back the curtain that it wasn't this fun and engaging. Dinner table conversations were not happening as I was looking through Medicare regulations in the Federal Register.

It's a little different. There are trade-offs and everything, especially early in your career. It's usually not the heady issues that you're dealing with, especially in a law firm environment. That was my experience too in law school. It was easy to get information about law firms or public interest to some degree or even some government jobs. When I say government, I think of prosecutors and defense counsel. There's nothing about in-house.

Perhaps that's because the idea is that's further down the line. You need some foundational experience before you would go in-house. It's not something that people talk about but it's helpful to think about it because you want to build the skills and the platform to be able to go into that work if it's something that you think you're interested in to be more intentional about going there instead of having it happen.

That's why I hope the show fills that a little bit to at least have people think about things, going, "That sounds interesting. That might be a good fit for me down the line." It is good training and background to have. It sounds like you went into some healthcare work at the law firm, which leads to where you are now down the line. It all comes together.

Life is a mystery that reveals itself in the rearview mirror. I always tell people I was lucky enough to graduate law school in 2000, which was a boom year for lawyers because of the internet explosion. I was lucky enough to have a specialty at a very highly-ranked school for that specialty, which made my job search at a law firm much more targeted. I was seeking out opportunities at firms that had healthcare programs or health law departments. I was lucky because there was and there continues to be a shortage of folks that do what I do, but there are opportunities in a lot of different states.

Life is a mystery that reveals itself in the rearview mirror.

I was in the Midwest in St. Louis. I had lived there my whole life and had been brainwashed that California was the land of fruits and nuts, and it was going to eventually break off after the big earthquake. I didn't listen to that and I came to a law firm that is now a very large national law firm that is focused on representing healthcare clients. That provided a great foundation and springboard for the rest of my career and where I am now.

That question comes up too. When you go to law school, it's much easier to have professional connections in the vicinity of the law school. Everybody knows the name of the school. Often, it facilitates getting jobs nearby. That's the challenge.

As I look back in that rear-view mirror, I don't want to make it sound like I was some bigwig policy wonk at 22 but having worked in an executive office, I knew Supreme Court judges in Missouri. I knew the US attorney in St. Louis. I had a lot of connections there. I don't think that I appreciated how much those would have been helpful early in my career or throughout my career. I came to Los Angeles as a newbie wet behind the ears. I knew nobody. My firm was well-known in health but I had no one in agencies or anything like that.

It was through Women Lawyers of LA where we're connected that I was able to build that network. It was like starting over. I remember our second year. We were coming back from visiting family in St. Louis. I was sobbing. I was like, "Why did we do this? Why did I leave? I have family and all this. Why did I come to this huge city where I don't know anyone in this very niche club profession and not know anyone?" That was risky or stupid.

I wanted to talk about that a little bit because it's a consideration. It's also a way of framing that what you did was bold. Part of it is that we necessarily understand the degree to which that's true in the legal profession when you're graduating from law school but also that first question of having people want to hire you outside that framework where they can't ask somebody they have known for twenty years, "What do you know about this person? Do you like them?" or get some recommendation like that. It's a testament to you for both being bold but also that you impressed people to be hired and to come out here. That boldness has ended up in a good situation in your career now. Tell me how you decided to move from the law firm to an in-house position. What attracted you to that?

I don't want to say it was the environment. I'll call it outside counsel because that's how I think about it. The way outside counsel works is that many times, clients have a question, a problem, or a need, and they call the outside counsel. The outside counsel's job is to make sure they know the law, come up with an answer, and give the client a game plan, and then they're done. They throw it over the wall, send the email, and wash their hands. They're done. It was unsatisfying because I would always wonder, "Did they follow up?" I would have insights about folks on their team, "Don't they know so-and-so isn't taking the ball?" I wanted to be somewhere I could have an impact, not just give advice. At later points in my career, I thought, "It would be nice to give advice and then not care if anybody does anything about it."

There are pros and cons to each.

Ultimately, that was not as fulfilling. I happened to go to lunch one day with a colleague who had been at my firm and then moved to a different firm. We were chatting about work. She said, "I got one of the partners to represent USC. They're looking for a healthcare attorney. Do you know anyone that might be a fit?" I was like, "That sounds interesting." That led me to the interview process and the next fifteen years of my career. That's another networking connection.

That's being open to opportunities and thinking about them. I like the way you're like, "I do know someone. She's sitting right here." That's being open to opportunities and recognizing when they come to you like that, "I should investigate that. That sounds pretty interesting." That is the difference in the role overall. You're integrated into the company or institution. You're dealing with strategies in a broader way for the client, having a longer range of involvement in that, and seeing how it works out or doesn't work out or what the next step is.

I do think that's true. For outside counsel, there's an in-between to have. There's doing the particular task or the question but having a bigger sense of where that fits into everything. What is the strategy? How can the strategy be achieved? It may not be this method. There may be something else to consider. I always consider the larger strategy. That's important to think about that.

That's a differentiator among outside counsel. I don't want someone that gives me an answer. That's not a lot of value-add to answer the question. I want you to step back and say, "What is their problem? What are they solving? How do I help them get there?"

"It may not be me. It may not be my avenue but you might consider this. This seems like something to explore even if it isn't your specific wheelhouse. If this is where you want to go, this seems like it might be an efficient way to explore. Think about that." I find that more fun to help achieve a result overall. Finding a way through the maze to do that is fun. You're problem-solving. That's your job as a lawyer, "How can I help?"

I asked you that and you answered it beautifully with the difference. You can talk about tasks, roles, and things like that but we're talking about meaning. How do you get meaning in your career? What do you feel proud about contributing to? You described well the difference in why you would choose to be an in-house counsel rather than an outside counsel with many different clients and what the differentiator is. You're steering and involved in a lot more things over a continual period.

Every day is different. That's a real differentiator. I had a friend who took an in-house counsel position at another health system. He was saying, "I can't believe how busy I am." At the law firm, I used to have more manageable hours. I was like, "That says a lot."

That's another thing. People think, "It will be very easy. I'll have a set timeframe. It won't be as erratic as the hours are in a law firm." I don't think that's the case anymore if it ever was.

All of us in the law, no matter what your role is, responsiveness is the clients' first complaint and expectation. With technology, we're expected to be available quite many hours in the day.

All of us in the law, no matter what our role is, need to put responsiveness for clients first.

It's so true. It's freeing yet not freeing at the same time.

The best of times and the worst of times.

It's good parts and not-so-good parts. Tell me about the experience at USC, what you were doing there, and then how you came to Cottage.

I spent fifteen years at the university. I was recruited as a healthcare attorney to be the medical school attorney. At that time, the university didn't have its healthcare operations. It had a 100-plus-year relationship with the county of Los Angeles. What was named LA County General Hospital used to be LAC + USC Medical Center. That hospital was staffed and continues to be staffed almost entirely by USC-employed faculty. My first job was primarily being a medical school attorney.

There were a good 10 or 12 years when I was at USC where I didn't go to work one day. I loved every minute of it. It was different and fun. They were the smartest people. I got to know world-class researchers, clinicians, executives, and amazing people. The university gradually grew its healthcare operation. We bought two hospitals that were located on the Health Sciences Campus from Tenet in 2009, which was my first big promotion. I gradually shifted more over to the university or the higher ed part of the business. That was what I liked least.

I always tell people, "I am not interested in footballs and fraternities. They're super high risk and not what I went to law school for." I was trying to get back into a healthcare role in 2019 or 2020. Cottage Health is located in Santa Barbara, California. We didn't say that from the outset. My husband and I spent a lot of time up here. We have been wine-tasting ever since we moved to California. We were up here in January 2020 taking a beach walk. I said, "I love it up here. It would be great to live up here but there are no jobs unless Cottage ever called me."

You put it out into the world. How soon after that?

In February, I got a call from a recruiter. Isn't that wild?

That is wild.

The recruitment continued during COVID. Without the interruption or the hiccup that COVID caused for all of us, I don't think that I would have looked at the opportunity seriously. Having that interruption allowed me to have a lot more perspective on my life, my career, and what I wanted out of life in my career. I went for it, and here we are.

You have to ask for it. You put it out there and then it came. That's pretty cool. You described it well. Having that timeframe where we were home for sure also meant not traveling and doing all the things that keep your mind occupied and busy and not able to focus on, "What do I want to accomplish? What's my highest and best use?" You're thinking about all of those things at that phase of your career. There was space to do that during COVID. A lot of people have come out of that. You see them doing different things. You're like, "That came from that introspection."

That was a gift.

I keep trying to find all the silver linings. That's how I like to look at things too. It's a silver lining to that very difficult time. Your point too about Santa Barbara is often the question that people say, "It's beautiful. I would love to live on the Central Coast," but there are not a lot of places to work as a professional. There are not many opportunities. That's also special that that came in that region too but also the general counsel positions. Tell me about how that experience differs from more discreet portfolio positions that you've had in-house and what you enjoyed.

I was ultimately the general counsel at USC during my last two years there. In the GC role in and of itself, you have to have broad shoulders because as a line lawyer or even one in management, you still have a place to go. You still have one step up. Somebody else is making the decisions for you. You can make recommendations but you're not on the line. I was presenting something to our board. It was a pretty significant matter. As I was giving the advice, I said, "The safe course of action for me as your GC is to recommend course A because I'm never going to get fired for that. This is a very safe role or path. Option B is a riskier path but it's the right one we should take."

I'm very cognizant that if they took my advice and we weren't successful, that's strike 1 or strike 3 for Stacy Bratcher. The stakes are a lot higher. I do think this follows the thread for other in-house roles. Although it's more pronounced for general counsel, the other things are the ethical duties and the ethical positions that you're in. As in-house, your ultimate client is the company. You also have clients who are your colleagues. The CEO is your client. However, sometimes those interests are not aligned. Ultimately, what's one of the hardest things is pivoting from those different clients and interests and carrying out your fiduciary duty, which is to the company.

That's true. People often think about the business part that you're also C-Suite. You're working with your colleagues in the C-Suite to advance the institution and the business of the institution but there's also the ethical questions in your larger role. People don't usually talk about that as much as thinking, "I also need to be a good business partner for this."

That's 101 but one other thing is a different perspective in comparing it against the law firm position. It's not enough for me to tell them if it's legal. I learned this in the last few years at USC. Something can be legal but it can be not right. The CLO or the GC's responsibility and ethical duty is to point it out. That can be hard sometimes to point out when you could do it but we need to gut check on our company values, ethics, and whether this is the right thing to do. That's a hard place to be because you're on the team. You don't want to be the hall monitor. Ultimately, you are the ethics officer for the institution. It's a fraught position sometimes.

To succeed in the role, you need to have trust and that people will come to you with things too. You have to balance that. It's a tightrope. Tell me also about mentors or sponsors who have made a difference in your career. Talk about the bar association's role in that regard too.

They say, "Are you smart, lucky, or good?" It's three different adjectives. I've been very lucky, especially moving to a new market to have built good relationships and have had a lot of different mentors and sponsors throughout my time. For Women Lawyers, I'm not super close with her but Dominique Shelton gave me a chance to be on the WLALA board. It was three years after I got to LA. That was an amazing leadership opportunity for somebody who didn't go to school with everybody else on the board.

Probably the most significant mentor or sponsor that I had was the former GC at USC, Carol Mauch Amir. We worked together for twelve years. She took a chance on hiring me out of this law firm, gave me so much responsibility, trusted me, and put me in positions over and over where I could grow and succeed. She advocated for me. I was smart and good but I was super lucky to have her in my corner. We're still close. She also helped convince me to take this job because even though I was so pumped up on my beach walk that I was going to live in Santa Barbara, it was still a big deal to even move two hours North. She said, "It's going to be great for you. You should be open to it." Here I am, and everything is good.

That's beautiful. Someone who has your back and wants what's best for you and your growth and development is cool. It's nice that was someone you were working with too. Sometimes it's outside the organization. It was helpful to that advancement too.

She was a good example to me of what type of boss and sponsor I should be to others because when someone is generous with you, you see that generosity is important, and then you're more generous with others. I credit her with so much of who I am as a leader and a GC.

The way to do it when you have that blessing is to pay it forward to others. That's the best you can do. You can be grateful to those who help you but the best thing is to model that behavior forward. Dominique is amazing. I'm glad you mentioned that. I wanted to talk about the Women Lawyers Association and bar associations because sometimes newer our lawyers in particular don't recognize the opportunity that includes. Sometimes it seems like, "That's something on top of all the work I'm doing already in the law firm or wherever I am. Is that helpful or meaningful? Is it extra work?"

It's such an opportunity for leadership to develop your leadership skills, which you can then bring into your work but also to meet, in the case of Women Lawyers of LA, women across a range of areas where you would never otherwise meet because you don't practice in that area. To understand the broad cross-section of women leaders across the law in that particular area where you're practicing and to have someone recognize that or say, "You have leadership potential," is nice.

I couldn't agree more. It's about the value of bar associations and other networking organizations. I have a philosophy for my team that you should be doing three networking contacts every week. A bar association gives you a great opportunity for that. I couldn't believe I was on the board with judges. We're sharing Chinese food and talking about the WLALApalooza fundraiser and the opportunity to learn sitting by US attorneys, AUSAs, other prosecutors, or criminal lawyers.

I didn't do criminal law but having that experience and those connections is a way. If you have a problem or a question, you have somebody that knows you in an informal setting that you can call up and ask, "I know this might sound dumb. Do you know anyone that does this?" I encourage it. I've joined the bar association up here in Santa Barbara. It has been a slow start since I moved during COVID but it's another great way to get to know the attorneys in town. I'm still a WLALA member though.

Me too, forever. It was such an important impact on my career and also feeling welcome. I moved to Los Angeles from Orange County. If I didn't have that experience, I wouldn't have met as many people as I had that helped me feel part of the legal community in LA much sooner than I otherwise would have felt.

It's crucial.

It's a similar experience to yours. What advice would you give to someone who might be considering going in-house either later in their career or maybe who is in-house and think that they would like to become a general counsel? Those are probably two different kinds of advice.

Not to quote Gretchen Rubin but one of the more important things in life is to know yourself, what you like, and what you don't like. There are these hefty ethical issues that in-house counsel is going to grapple with. There's also an issue of risk tolerance. I would not have this job and I wouldn't be in an in-house department very long if I was telling people no all the time. In twenty years, I've said no on one hand, which is a strong no. I'm the Department of Yes, If.

One of the more important things in life is to know yourself and what you like and what you don't like.

Especially junior folks that don't have experience that things do work out, there are very few things in the law that you can't fix. If you're somebody that likes the rules and likes people to follow the rules all the time and have everything perfect, neat, and tidy, then an in-house job is going to be painful for you. As I reflect on my perspective as a law firm lawyer, it always looks so easy to give the client, "This is what you should do. Why can't you pass a policy and get a policy together? How hard is that?"

It seems so easy from a distance but when you're in the organization, five other departments have to weigh in on this policy, "Our supply chain or our IT if we have this policy is going to cost us $1 million." There are so many practical reasons why your law firm mouse trap idea isn't going to work. To be successful, lawyers in in-house environments have to be able to think gray. That is very inconsistent with how we're trained in law school. It's not in Iraq. There's no conclusion at the end of the email that somebody sent me asking for help.

It's not a purely legal question. As you described it, there are practicalities. Maybe it's culture, organization, or cost, "We could do that but forget that. That's not going to happen." You have to balance figuring out the answer. It's gray legally but it's also so many other factors that go into practicality and implementation.

"Is it doable? That's what the ivory tower wants us to do but can we actually do that?" I've asked that question a lot in meetings, "Do we think we can do that? If we commit to do it, then we're going to be measured by whether we execute."

That's a good question. That's a good thing to think about before you make the decision or commit to a particular course, "This means A, B, and C. Do we have buy-in for that? Is that feasible?" All of those things go into the decision-making. If you're in the general counsel role, you're part of the group that's considering all of those things in what the best course forward is.

My job a lot of times is to ask those questions, "It's going to require this recurring budget, these staff, and this tech. Can we do that? We're going to have to report to a regulatory agency that we're doing this." Folks can see one slice of the pie. I don't know if all in-house lawyers do that but that's what I see my role as. It's to shine the light on all facets of a course of action.

That's a good consideration because others who are part of that decision-making process may not have factored that in, "That sounds good but that means these things also have to happen. We have buy-in for that." That also helps make sure you're going to implement. Once you've moved forward, you're going to fully implement instead of stopping in the middle and realizing, "We had no idea that also meant this." It would have made a different decision, to begin with, if we didn't think of that. It makes more sense to raise that and to present that for people to think about, especially if they're legal things, "We have to report to regulators or this and that. We didn't realize that."

That would be an epic failure to put forth a solution, and then nobody knew what was going to be required on the back end. They’re like, "Thanks, Stacy, for your great solution."

You need fully informed decision-making. That's part of the fully informed. What about the general counsel rules specifically? Do you think there's anything that people should keep in mind in terms of skill building or how it differs from other in-house counsel roles? You said broader shoulders and things like that.

You mentioned earlier being a business partner. Know yourself better. Do you care about the business? One of the most important things, and maybe why I've been stuck in healthcare so much, is because I feel that to add value, I need to know the business. I ask the next question because I'm thinking through, "You want this to happen." I ask a lot of clinical questions.

I was dealing with the issue of gender-affirming care. I was interviewing the doctor. I said, "Is there an issue with the continuity of this treatment? Do we want to make sure the person has insurance?" It's those sorts of things. They asked me a black-and-white question, but my answer is, "Can this happen from a clinical standpoint?" If I came out of the automotive industry, I wouldn't know to ask those kinds of questions. It's a bright and shiny thing to be an in-house counsel, but I would only want to work someplace where I cared about the business because you have to do both. It's Yes, And.

Have care about it but also have that understanding of how it is going to play out so that you ask the right questions and look at things.

Otherwise, you would be giving them a dud.

That's an important thing to think about because sometimes people will have certain career goals, "I want to become a general counsel," but a general counsel where and in what setting?

All the jobs are very different. A public company versus a nonprofit or a corporate law department. Are you a CLO with a broader portfolio? Everything is different. Be more specific. As somebody pursuing this career path, I would try to think that the industry, the type of company, and the size of a company makes a difference. How is the management structure? What's the board structure? It's a lot more nuanced than billing hours.

That's an important point because sometimes people think about the title. It isn't just the title because the title can mean different things in different settings, but also what you're talking about is much more holistic. Your experience and your role are going to be very different depending on the setting and the culture of that business, and honestly, whether you have a deep love and care for the particular business that you are advising. That matters too. What are you most proud of so far in your career as an in-house lawyer?

This was a great question. Thank you again for giving me some of these questions as a prep because it takes a while to reflect on a twenty-year career. I have a couple of things. First of all, in a non-legal and non-individual contributor thing, when I was at USC, every year, they did an Employee of the Year among the 28,000 employees. They took recommendations and nominations from all across the university. One year, I nominated the person that won. Not only did I nominate him, but I also solicited support from other people who I knew were influential in that process. It meant so much to him to get this award. I was so happy that he was recognized and that I had a role in that. That was cool.

Likewise, I have most enjoyed, back to our conversation about mentors and sponsors, sponsoring others. I've done that not just with other lawyers but in our office at USC. I helped two different administrative assistants become paralegals. I talked to them about their career goals, nudged them into getting out of their narrow box, "I'm an assistant," got the university to pay for their education as a paralegal, and then got them promoted into those roles. That was cool. I know that made a difference in their lives for their families. Our office was better for having them in those roles. Big picture, being able to have an impact on an individual has been probably what I'm most proud of.

When you were talking about recognizing them and encouraging them to become paralegals, I was thinking, "That's how I feel in teaching and seeing the students." Seeing something in someone, encouraging them to pursue that, and then seeing them blossom is rewarding.

It's the best. Having a different perspective, being further along, and looking back, you can see opportunities that other people don't see. If I think back to where I was at a law firm, I was like, "I'm going to get my 2,000 hours. I'm trying to hit these goals without seeing what is out there for me." Being able to look to other people in my career path or my department and say, "You can do more. Have you thought about X, Y, Z?" I love that. It's the best being able to help somebody do something they didn't even know was an option.

Having a different perspective allows you to see opportunities that other people don't see.

Think about the ripple effect that has on their families and other opportunities. It's one person but it has a lot of other impacts too. That's such a cool answer. You're like, "I've helped other people grow, which is neat." You mentioned something important to that, which is having a little bit of distance, objectivity, a little bit more experience, and the space to observe someone, "You have something. You could do something good with this." It's things that they don't see either because they're too close or they don't recognize the opportunity. It's neat to acknowledge. It's having that perspective that allows you to contribute to their growth. I love that answer. It's time for lightning-round questions. Here's the first one. Which talent would you most like to have but don't?

Play piano. I always wanted to play piano. We didn't have one growing up. I rented one when I was in LA. This will tell you everything about me. I had a colleague in HR at USC. We went to lunch, and I told her I wanted to play piano. She had been encouraging me. I was telling her about my progress. I said, "I can only do one hand. I want to do both hands." She said, "You don't have to be the Vice President of Piano." I was like, "Thank you for that." We don't have to achieve everywhere, but I would love to wake up tomorrow and be able to play piano.

Especially those of us who are intent on whatever we're doing is going to go, "It's not just a hobby. It's a full commitment thing."

I'm going to master it.

I felt relieved and released when you said that. I'm like, "You could do something for fun."

It's very grounding.

It's very helpful. It allows you the freedom to do that. What is the trait you most deplore in yourself and then in others?

I'm going to encourage you to ask the question in a different way, which is the opposite. What do you most love about yourself? I'm very impatient. I realized a long time ago that one of my top values is efficiency. That's probably from this in-house counsel role where there are so many demands but as a result, I get quite impatient.

Who are some of your favorite writers?

I was an English major before going to law school. I encourage everyone to pursue an undergraduate degree that requires a lot of writing. No matter what, I write a lot of beautiful emails now. I might not write briefs, but I got a couple on my wall that are so perfect. I did a lot of reading. Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon is one of my favorite books. Mary Karr is a great memoir writer. Truman Capote's In Cold Blood is one of the best books of all time.

That's a good point. I have been collecting the book recommendations of various guests. We have a whole separate listing of book recommendations.

I'll have to check it out.

I'm going to place one of yours on that list.

I'm going to pick one for fun this summer.

It has been interesting. I've gotten some great reading ideas from this too. Who is your hero in real life?

My mom. I thought about that a lot. She taught me resilience, not necessarily directly, but from watching her. She kept going at every turn. I'm lucky to have that as an example in a career that can be demanding and tough and put you to the test pretty much from when you pick up your pencil to take the LSAT.

Even when you take your first-year exams and everything, I remember it was a humbling experience. That's all I can say. For what in your life do you feel most grateful?

We talked about this a little bit before. I feel like I hit the lottery every day. I work in healthcare. Being a healthy person and having a life of peace is a huge blessing. We don't appreciate enough the life that we have here in the US and how peaceful it is that we're not living under bomb threats, martial law, and all those sorts of things. Health and peace.

You're getting to the real core of things and the meaning of life criteria. That's good. You're right. Those are things that you take for granted sometimes. It's good to be reminded of that. Given the choice of anyone in the world, who would you invite to a dinner party? It could be more than one person. They do not have to be currently with us on this Earth. It can be a combination.

I would want to go to dinner with my husband. We have two kids and a busy life. Spending time with him would be great.

We're continuing with the fundamentals theme. I think about the building blocks of a good life. Here's the last question. What is your motto if you have one?

This is a tough one. I don't know if it's a motto, but it's advice that I give to a lot of people and try to remind myself. Pay attention. We didn't talk about this, but all of us as citizens of the world need to look up and see the bigger picture and the small details. There's a lot of beauty in life if we pay attention and focus on that. There are a lot of opportunities for us to make a difference if we focus on that, like the Ferris Bueller line, "If you don't stop and look around, it might pass you by."

Life moves pretty fast. That's an important formative movie growing up. Thank you so much, Stacy. I appreciate it. I love getting back to the core meaningful things in life. That's a great message from our discussion. There are also many great things that you pointed out about the general counsel's role that is not typical. There are things that people talk about, but you delved into the things that aren't discussed as much but are important to consider in that role. Thank you so much for sharing that and joining the show.

Thanks for the opportunity. It has been a great exercise to reflect on my career, look ahead, and see how I can focus on these fundamentals more and continue delivering great service to our company. Thanks so much. I enjoyed the conversation.

Thanks so much for joining. I appreciate it, Stacy.