Biglaw

Performance Reviews Suck, But This Biglaw Firm Is Trying To Change The Game

If 'flash feedback' is the start of innovation in the employer-employee relationship, then bring it on.

By  
on

As a former HR (human resources fka personnel) lawyer for many years, I heard clients whine ALL THE TIME about performance evaluations, having to write them, having to deliver them, and then suffering the blowback from employees who were royally pissed about the review, the number grade, and the paltry amount, if any, of a raise. It was not pretty. No one, unless someone was sadistic and/or had way too much time to spare, liked the whole process, which seemed to change from year to year without rhyme or reason. One year a “1” would be “walks on water,” or superb, and the next year, a “5” would be superb, while the “1” would be code for “clean out your desk, you’re outta here.” Huh?

Here are just a couple of the issues I routinely saw with performance evaluations:

1) The “sandbag” situation. The supervisor/manager, or whoever was in charge of writing the review and giving it, would save up all the problems, concerns, failures, and the like until review time. The unsuspecting employee would think her performance was fine until the evaluation IED blew up at review time. Talk about a lack of due process, talk about the inability to correct problems during the course of the year, talk about the unfairness of a process that left the employee marching to HR after the review to complain.

Yes, the employee could write a response to the review, and yes, HR would review the rebuttal, and then HR would investigate the concerns. Days, weeks, if not months were consumed resolving the fallout from a bad review. Wouldn’t it have been so much easier if there had been conversations during the year about what needed to improve?

I don’t think any employee wants a bad review, and there’s usually something that the employee does that merits praise. Too often, it’s all or nothing. Talk about a workplace morale killer.

2) The “I want X gone today” situation. The supervisor/manager would want to terminate someone RIGHT THIS MINUTE, but there was not a single scrap of documentation to justify the termination at that point in time. The common scenario here would be the HR person coming into my office, closing the door (one reason why I am in favor of having private close-the-door availability of lawyer space), and tossing an employee file on my desk. “The manager wants today to be X’s last day.” Huh? Why? I’d review the file and there was nothing in the file, no documentation of oral warnings, no written warnings, no final warnings. Nada, zip, zilch. And the basis for the termination is? Any violation of the code of conduct? Any other violation that merits immediate termination? The good old standby of performance issues?

“Nope,” would be the response. “The manager just wants X gone.” We all know how that story goes.

Sponsored

3) The “Do it Yourself” review. The supervisor tells the employee to grade herself and then discuss it with the supervisor. My feeling is that if you want to do it yourself, then go to a DIY store. So, I’ve thought a lot about performance evaluations over the years. There has to be a better way.

Now comes the story of how a Biglaw firm is changing its approach to evaluations.

Kathryn Rubino reports that now employees will get “flash feedback,” letting them know how they are doing during the year instead of waiting for the annual review torture. It seems that the “flash feedback” is designed to help develop employees, so that they can learn from mistakes as they make them (not that associates in Biglaw ever make mistakes) and/or show associates how to handle matters without reinventing the wheel and without having to write off all the associate time in so doing.

In principle, it sounds like a good idea, and it dovetails with the premise that millennials wants feedback on a continuing basis, not just at review time (a process that could also go the way of the dinosaur.)

However, Hogan’s approach is three pieces of feedback from coworkers every four months.  Is that often enough?

Sponsored

Remember, dinosaurs, when the term “feedback” was used exclusively in science? When it was purely that high-pitched, annoying noise emanating from a speaker or microphone that forced us to cover our ears in school assemblies? That term has come a long way since then.

Will the lawyers who provide the flash feedback be willing to document the conversations that when it comes time to decide whether to retain the associate or cut him loose, will there be sufficient documentation to support whatever decision is made?

Many management researchers and practitioners have long thought, as far back as the 1950s, that the traditional performance appraisal method sucks.  It creates employee defensiveness, perpetuates a vicious circle of declining performance, and no one wants to be defined merely by a number grade.

Despite our well-deserved reputation for being professionally confrontational, I think that many of us are loathe to criticize our colleagues, at least on paper.  (We’ll exclude from this discussion those of us who bully, scream and yell at staff, dress down junior lawyers, and who display other reprehensible interpersonal skills.) I think we tiptoe around criticism, having to give it, and especially how to take it, but I think the “flash feedback” method makes sense, especially for the millennial generation of lawyers.

We, as dinosaurs, have been much more stoic about performance appraisals, dutifully awaiting them every year, and not pushing back against the formula as the millennials are. Good for them.

We need to innovate every aspect of the profession and stories abound about innovations in the practice of law from technological perspectives. One workplace innovation that is lagging behind is the care and feeding of employees, professionals, and staff.  If “flash feedback” is the start of innovation in the employer-employee relationship, then bring it on. May it be the start of many more.

old lady lawyer elderly woman grandmother grandma laptop computerJill Switzer has been an active member of the State Bar of California for 40+ years. She remembers practicing law in a kinder, gentler time. She’s had a diverse legal career, including stints as a deputy district attorney, a solo practice, and several senior in-house gigs. She now mediates full-time, which gives her the opportunity to see dinosaurs, millennials, and those in-between interact — it’s not always civil. You can reach her by email at oldladylawyer@gmail.com.

Topics

, , , ,