I think that a good deal of responsibility for the marginalization of
our field rests with us.  And I think that we possess a good deal of
the solution options.
 
First of all, I still see and hear of b-law faculty who refuse to act
like academics.  They don't publish; they don't serve on committees;
they teach their classes and run to do "practitioner" kinds of
activities, including acting as an informal in-house counsel for
every student, faculty member, and administrator who has a legal
problem and wants free (or discounted) legal advice.
 
I'm not advocating compete refusal of collegial advice; but, Sandy
Hurd said it so succinctly a couple of years ago in an ALSB
NEWSLETTER OP-ED piece, "Please Don't Call Us Lawyers..."
 
Secondly, we have pidgeon-holed ourselves and have not gotten out to
do the "missionary" work.  We need to approach colleagues (as opposed
to waiting to be approached) about joint research and curriculum
ventures.  We need to explore the field and find out who in our own
respective schools are doing research that could use some "legal
prespective" input.  And then we have to offer and follow through.
 
We need to look for joint curriculum projects: guest lecturing in a
management class, formulating team-taught courses, insisting that law
courses be included in minors.  We need to show our colleagues in b-
schools that we can teach critical thinking; if law doesn't teach us
critical and analytical thinking, then it teaches us nothing.  I
would argue that many of our non-law b-school colleagues are scared
to death about the prospect of teaching critical thinking.  We can
provide a bridge for them.  We can also carve out yet another niche
of expertise, just as we've done in many schools regarding business
ethics.
 
We also need to go outside of the schools of business and cultivate
the Arts and Science people.  There are bunches of them who have
interests in the law.  For example, we have a very informal reading
group here of faculty interested in the law; I and a couple of others
have law degrees, but no one else.  Yet, they come from Philosophy,
English, History, Econ., Poli Sci., Womens' Studies, etc.  This kind
of situation creates a very ripe area for "missionary" work.
 
I have to admit that when I can get someone to listen to me about the
need for law in the b-school curriculum and the legitimacy of law as
a functional discipline within b-schools, I usually will get a
convert; at least, I won't have the opponent which I once had.  Alot
of times, I just call someone up and ask for a half-hour of their
time to talk (I did this last week with our provost; I went over for
a half-hour meeting loaded down with copies of the ABLJ, JLSE,
Newsletter, the annual conference program, & the ad hoc committee
reports; I told him that I just wanted to talk about "business law."
The meeting was scheduled for one half hour; an hour and fifteen
minutes later, the Provost was still asking me questions about my
"discipline."  Within a half-hour into the meeting, he had no problem
recognizing that law is a functional discipline. It turned out to be a
very productive meeting!)
 
These are the kinds of things we need to do (and I'm beating on a drum
that Gay Jentz has been beating on for years).  Obviously we won't
sway everyone.  But, I think it's the only shot we;ve got.
 
Dan Herron