First, Jeff discussed the firm's practice objectives in "working hour" rather than "billable hour" terms. Jeff explained that he and his partners had made the choice to place an importance on their family lives. This meant that they expected to accomplish professional tasks within normal working hours and would work beyond that when necessary but would not regularly seek out work which would demand extra time.
Second, Jeff shared with his staff that he and his partners felt their community and client industry activities were important to the success of the firm. He said he hoped these activities would demonstrate his interest in improving the conditions in the community and industry he served while at the same time leading to new work.
Third, he candidly shared with them that, by building up the practice, they would all be able to emphasize the type of work which would be more profitable. His generosity and frequent expressions of appreciation made it clear to staff that they would share in the success of the practice.
Fourth, Jeff met with staff for one hour every other Monday morning to critique relations with each client and to discuss ways in which those relations could improve. Staff input was valuable since employees usually implemented actual communication with clients and often were involved in substantive matters under Jeff's direction. Staff brainstorming sessions were particularly productive in developing ways to improve service quality.
Jeff did not stop with these techniques. He went on to make the firm's staff tasks as easy as possible. He and his partners made sure that staff had constant access to all firm information so that their work on projects would not stumble upon gaps in information. Each partner carefully explained the flow of information which they preferred, so that staff could process the information most efficiently.
At the biweekly staff meetings, Jeff outlined the partners' calendars for the coming week so staff would know when to expect the partners to be in the office as well as what issues might be critical at what times. Jeff and his partners also designated the final half hour in the working day as a catch-up period, to be interrupted only by emergencies. Within this 30-minute period, staff was allowed to organize their own information and leave the office on time.
Jeff's time spent on staff influenced staff attitudes regarding work, clients, and their relationships with Jeff and his partners. By devoting time and attention to very specific points, he conveyed to staff the importance of each matter and eliminated the potential for misunderstandings. The end result was that the firm's partners and the office staff worked together to develop a very profitable and personally satisfying practice.
Attorneys often have problems relating to staff. As a result, staff turnover in law offices is often higher than desirable, and the relationships occurring between attorneys and staff are frequently adversarial. It is within the power of the attorney to change this to a greater extent than it is possible for staff to effect any changes.
Attorneys must start by recognizing the value of their staff. Staff capabilities are almost consistently underestimated and underutilized by professionals. By recognizing the potential of each individual staff member, a realistic set of expectations may be drawn on the parts of the attorney and the staff.
There are several specific things attorneys can do to make staff relations less adversarial and more productive. The attorney can begin by introducing staff (whether receptionist, paralegal, or associate) to clients. This places a value on staff input and lets the staff member know the attorney is proud to have that person in the office.
Attorneys can also set an example of the type of behavior they expect from staff. Staff tends to emulate the "boss," and so the attorney must live by the rules set for staff. This may mean more time spent on organization, prompt return of telephone calls, or an increased priority placed on client relationships.
IMPACT OF NEGATIVE COMMUNICATION
Attorneys communicate volumes by how they refer to clients in the presence of staff. Whatever they communicate will be implicitly communicated by the staff to the clients. Unless a client truly is not important to the practice (and what client is not?), negativity should never be expressed in regard to that person or business.
For example, consider the client who is less than pleasant. This person is unusually demanding, slow to pay bills, and disrespectful of others' time. In the absence of the client but the presence of staff, the attorney may refer to the client in less than complimentary terms. Hearing this, the staff begins to think of this client as less than important to the practice. Eventually the client's work does not receive proper attention from the staff in terms of timeliness and quality, and what's more important, the staff begins to treat the client coolly. The results were predictable to an outsider but less obvious to the attorney, staff, and even the client. This client will eventually find another attorney more willing to cater to his demanding nature. No great loss? Wrong. The biggest loss was not just the client's fees but staff awareness that the attorney did not hold client interests in high esteem.
The most effective way to prevent staff misunderstanding is a rule most people learn from their parents as children: do not say about a person what you would not tell that person directly. In the law office, this philosophy should be rigidly adhered to. Client interests should always be placed as top priority, no matter who the client is. Staff also deserves this kind of attention. An attorney should never complain about a staff person, associate, or even partner to anyone else in the firm, unless the comment is called for and appropriate.
