Using Interactive Reviews to Motivate and Train Staff

A firm of 10 attorneys in a large city relied on 12 staff members to keep office operations running smoothly. All of the attorneys agreed that the employees were meeting the firm's basic expectations. No one felt that more could be expected from the staff because of the limits of staff education, training, ability, and even desire. One former staff member had resigned to enroll in law school the previous year, but the attorneys agreed that this particular case was an exception to the norm and that the rest of the staff had limited career aspirations.
 

The surprise for these attorneys came when consultants were called in to create a new firm brochure. The consultants insisted on interviewing all of the attorneys and several key staff to piece together a complete firm identity. As a result of the interviews, the attorneys received not only a new brochure, but some unexpected news from the consultants: the staff was far from motivated to meet their full potential.

The attorneys invited the consultants to a meeting to explain this information more fully. The consultants said that in speaking with firm employees, they had discovered low morale, internal friction, and lack of ambition to make sure all tasks were well done. The reason, according to the consultants, was very low expectations from the attorneys.

The attorneys subsequently called a firm meeting, inviting all staff members. One attorney with a comfortable rapport with the employees acted as the meeting's moderator. He told the staff about the conclusions drawn by the consultants and the concern this raised for the attorneys. He then asked staff to submit suggestions, anonymous if necessary, on how firm morale could be improved. He told the participants that all suggestions would be read and discussed by the attorneys and then discussed again with the staff. From this basis, a more concerted effort would be made to improve morale and motivate everyone to reach their full potential.

The attorneys were surprised at the responses they received! The most frequent suggestion was for a review process by which employees could be measured for professional growth within the firm. The attorneys had ceased to hold review meetings almost two years before because the meetings only seemed to increase employee anxiety regarding employer-employee relations. Since then, staff supervision had consisted primarily of scheduling vacations and sick leave and monitoring whether employees arrived at the office on time and stayed within meal and break time limits. The employees, in their own words, suggested that they wanted a better method by which they could be evaluated and, they hoped, rewarded.

The firm held another meeting with all the attorneys and staff and decided by democratic process on a review system which could be fair to the attorneys as well as staff. Everyone agreed to evaluate the system in six months and accept, reject, or alter the program. Six months later, the staff made a few adjustments but expressed their general satisfaction. The attorneys noted their delight at staff's interest in the firm's well-being and their increased expectations regarding staff potential.

The employee review process is often regarded with fear and trepidation by employers and employees and for good reason. In most cases, it tends to be a one-sided process, where the staff member is called into an attorney's office and seated across from the attorney. With a large desk in between and usually stacked with paperwork, the employee is asked a few general questions before a judgment is rendered. The staff member is usually too inhibited to voice concerns and generally agrees to whatever the attorney suggests.

A far more effective system would be a two-way review process. This would allow the staff person to review his or her own performance based on the same criteria the attorney uses. A review meeting is then held in which the employee and attorney discuss each point, the comments on that point made by each, and possible improvements or rewards. By providing the employee an equal opportunity to vocalize regarding his or her performance, that employee feels a greater sense of ownership in the process and accountability for conclusions reached.

Managers who use this system report that employees frequently rate themselves lower than supervisors do. This provides a uniquely beneficial opportunity for the supervisor to praise the employee's good points, reassuring the employee and instilling a less adversarial atmosphere.

The opportunity for feedback and discussion is invaluable in training staff. At the same time, this process can be and should be used to map out career and training paths with employees. The program generally receives considerable positive feedback from staff and attorneys who have used it. The only negative response is that the process takes more time than the traditional "one-sided" review meeting.

Still, the increased attention paid to each individual employee does not require the time often devoted to far less important items such as libraries, decor, and computers.

EMPLOYEE REVIEW POINTS

A number of criteria can be used to evaluate law practice staff. The points should always be used in a positive, not negative, sense. A scale by which to rate the employee should also be used so that conclusions are not "yes" or "no." Some examples of criteria might be attendance, organization, impresssion, general attitudes, and skill areas. These allow different employees with different strengths to be recognized for their individual qualities. It is not recommended that attorneys use any written form to evaluate or discuss staff personality traits. The reason is that such forms are sometimes not kept completely confidential and can be very damaging to staff morale.