An Inside Look at the Skadden Annual Review Process

GREGORY BERRY
(2009 rating was “Meets Expectations”): 2010 rating – [ ].
Chargeable Hours: 2,140 hours for 2009; 1,835 actual YTD hours through 10/31/10.
Docket: Major matters are [redacted] and several [redacted] matters.
Evaluations: [Four partners] provided reviews. His ratings were generally “exceeds expectations” and “meets expectations”. All reviewers were “eager” to work with him again and all except [one partner] (who sees him at class level) believe his is performing above class level.
Strengths: [Partner #1] called GREGORY BERRY’s performance on the [redacted] matter “stellar,” referring to GREGORY BERRY as “tireless.” He “simply marshaled the evidence, created exhibits and helped prepare witnesses, wrote briefs and outlines of opening statements, etc. – all done excellently and well above my expectations of a third year associate.” [Partner #1] is so “eager” to work with GREGORY BERRY that he asked him to be his “‘senior’ associate on a new price fixing matter and potential transaction.” He also noted that GREGORY BERRY is “very efficient.”
[Partner #2] noted that GREGORY BERRY “is mature, professional, confident and competent. He also has a great work ethic and is always willing to take more work.”
[Two partners] noted GREGORY BERRY’s ability to “handle a great deal of responsibility” and “effectively manage a lot of sometime conflicting tasks.” [One partner] also noted his good judgment and that GREGORY BERRY is a “great team player.”
Weaknesses: [One partner] sees none, while [another partner] said GREGORY BERRY’s “presentation has a bit of a ‘New York’ edge to it. That may need to be moderated over time.”
Additional Training: [One partner] thought GREGORY BERRY could benefit from additional training in the preparation of key litigation documents (e.g., discovery responses).
Firm Affiliation:
Partnership Potential: [One partner] sees “great potential.”
Review Message:
Upward Feedback Report:
Self-Assessment: GREGORY BERRY believes the work he did on the [redacted] arbitration is the “most substantive and comprehensive” he has done at the Firm. Conversely, he also says he spent a lot of time on a securities litigation document review, which he called less challenging and rewarding. He would like to do some brief writing and prepare for and defend depositions as well as more transactional experience from start to finish on matter with a second request. He perceives a “glass ceiling” where partners are reluctant to let associates take on key tasks when they have not done them previously (e.g., depositions); he believes this hinders skill development.