Keeping Partners Engaged In Associate Development

Firms have good reasons for offering formal associate development programs such as law firm universities and mentoring programs. Clients expect trained associates and associates expect training. Formal programs, often with full-time staff support, can effectively deliver training to groups of associates.

One-on-one training and mentoring by partners (“informal training”) also is a critical component of associate development. Unfortunately, associate surveys such as The American Lawyer's reveal dissatisfaction with partner-associate relations and training in many firms. How can law firms enhance informal training by partners?

• By understanding three common partner perspectives on associate development and framing reasons for involvement in persuasive terms, and
• By ensuring formal programs support informal training.

Stars are Born, Not Made

“I see the stars and I invest in them. I don't have time to mentor those who won't be here long.” Many partners with this perspective started working in an era when leverage and the pressure to bill hours were lower. Most associates ' stars or not ' learned by working closely with partners.

With today's higher leverage and billing pressures, opportunities to work with partners are less common and often only available to those who are immediate stars. Given the demands on partners and associate attrition rates, it might seem a wise way to allocate partner time. However, it underestimates the impact partners can have on associate development.

Research shows that the combination of talent and treatment can yield stars. First, people often behave as they are expected to, so expecting strong performance ' and providing opportunities to demonstrate it ' can create a self-fulfilling prophecy (a phenomenon conceptualized in Robert Merton's Social Theory and Social Structure in 1957). Second, innate talent is insufficient. The support of colleagues and institutional resources, including formal training, is a key determinant of success. See, eg, “The Risky Business of Hiring Stars,” Harvard Business Review, May 2004 (Groysberg, Nanda, and Nohria).

Although partner attention might not turn every associate into a star, it is likely to create a group of solid “B players.” These are the associates who always produce quality work on time. They might not have the ambition to become top partners, but are essential to satisfying clients. See, eg, “Let's Hear it for the B Players,” Harvard Business Review, June 2003 (DeLong and Vijayaraghavan).

That treatment by partners can significantly influence associate performance is good news for many firms, especially those who hire numerous associates. Most of those associates are not top 10 law school “stars.” Firms invest significant sums in hiring ' large firms with summer associate programs can invest more than $200,000 per hire. If partner attention has the potential to increase the rate of return on that investment, it is worth considering.

How can firms convey the message that stars can be made ' and B players are crucial ' to partners who believe their time is best invested in the unmistakable stars?

Help them to see this issue in economic terms. Run the numbers to determine the amount invested in hiring an associate. How long would it take to recoup that investment at average associate billing, utilization, and realization rates? How long to make a profit? Calculate the average tenure and compare it to the break even and profit points. How much does premature attrition cost? Would informal training extend the average tenure to meet or exceed the break even or profit points? Associates at many firms cite the lack of informal training as a reason for leaving, so it is reasonable to expect that additional informal training could positively impact retention. Given the size of the hiring investment, it is a hypothesis worth testing at most firms.

Discuss hiring and staffing realities. There are not enough stars to meet demand, so when an associate leaves, there is no guarantee that the replacement will be higher quality, or even equal. Most firms need B players to support the stars. Thus, it is usually wise to focus attention on those associates already with the firm and develops their strengths, whether they are stars or B players.

Assure them that the firm's formal training will support their informal efforts (more on that below), and that they are not expected to waste time with associates who are incapable of doing the job. They simply need to treat associates as they were treated, and give them a fair chance at good opportunities even when “star” qualities are not immediately apparent.

Too Many Demands

These partners acknowledge the value of investing in associate development, but demands such as client service and business development usually take priority, especially in light of associate attrition rates. “Why train them, they'll still leave” is a common refrain. They are pleased when a firm establishes formal training programs because they believe those programs will reduce the need for their informal training.

Their individual efforts are still needed, though, so how can this type of partner be persuaded to move associate development up the priority list?

Explain what is in it for them. Help them to see why investing their time in associate development will directly benefit their practice. For example:

• Associates will produce higher quality work;
• The partner will spend less time correcting the same mistakes; and
• The clients will be more satisfied.

Address the concern that associates will eventually leave, so it is not productive to invest in informal training. They need the training to do quality work while at the firm. Further, if associates leave, they often go to work with clients and well-trained, satisfied former associates are likely to strengthen client relationships.

Ensure that associate development efforts are not indirectly discouraged by firm practices. For example, compensation and promotion systems that primarily reward new business generation can encourage partners to focus time there at the expense of associate development and other important firm-building activities.

Everybody's Mentor

If associates could vote, they might select this type of partner as “mentor of the year.” They spend time chatting with associates about their daily work and career aspirations. They organize formal training. They give timely feedback. These partners volunteer for the firm's training, recruiting, and other committees concerned with the people side of the business.

These partners struggle with balancing associate development with client development and other “practice-building” activities, and often devote too much time to associate development at the expense of their practices. Because credibility as a partner is often based on practice success, this threatens their ability to achieve practice and associate development goals.

What can firms do to harness the enthusiasm of these partners for associate development while helping them to develop their practices in economically beneficial ways?

Explicitly encourage balance between associate development efforts and individual practice development. Prevent the firm from taking advantage of their inclination to invest in associate development by ensuring other partners share these responsibilities, eg, by rotating the “team training partner” or work assignment responsibility and having term limits for training committee membership.

Associate development efforts might be undervalued compared to client development because the benefits are harder to quantify. Fight that tendency by developing ways to consider them in setting compensation and determining promotions. Also consider non-monetary ways to recognize their contributions, eg, through leadership positions such as Professional Development Partner or Associate Development Committee Chair.

Supporting Informal Training

Regardless of partners' perspectives on associate development, formal programs can support and leverage their individual efforts. For example, firms can help associates develop essential skills through classroom training in subjects including:

• Legal skills such as client-oriented research, analysis, and writing. Law schools teach these subjects but usually not in ways that stress practicality and efficiency;
• Business concepts such as finance and accounting, to help lawyers speak their clients' language; and
• Practice area knowledge such as taking depositions or drafting contracts.

Firms can also support informal training by offering courses to help partners hone their mentoring, delegation and feedback-giving skills. Associates can be taught how to solicit and use feedback. These management skills are critical to informal training and can be learned, but are rarely taught in law school or law firms. Through this complementary combination of formal and informal training, associates can attain their career goals and firms can improve their return on investment in associates.

Firms have good reasons for offering formal associate development programs such as law firm universities and mentoring programs. Clients expect trained associates and associates expect training. Formal programs, often with full-time staff support, can effectively deliver training to groups of associates.

One-on-one training and mentoring by partners (“informal training”) also is a critical component of associate development. Unfortunately, associate surveys such as The American Lawyer's reveal dissatisfaction with partner-associate relations and training in many firms. How can law firms enhance informal training by partners?

• By understanding three common partner perspectives on associate development and framing reasons for involvement in persuasive terms, and
• By ensuring formal programs support informal training.

Stars are Born, Not Made

“I see the stars and I invest in them. I don't have time to mentor those who won't be here long.” Many partners with this perspective started working in an era when leverage and the pressure to bill hours were lower. Most associates ' stars or not ' learned by working closely with partners.

With today's higher leverage and billing pressures, opportunities to work with partners are less common and often only available to those who are immediate stars. Given the demands on partners and associate attrition rates, it might seem a wise way to allocate partner time. However, it underestimates the impact partners can have on associate development.

Research shows that the combination of talent and treatment can yield stars. First, people often behave as they are expected to, so expecting strong performance ' and providing opportunities to demonstrate it ' can create a self-fulfilling prophecy (a phenomenon conceptualized in Robert Merton's Social Theory and Social Structure in 1957). Second, innate talent is insufficient. The support of colleagues and institutional resources, including formal training, is a key determinant of success. See, eg, “The Risky Business of Hiring Stars,” Harvard Business Review, May 2004 (Groysberg, Nanda, and Nohria).

Although partner attention might not turn every associate into a star, it is likely to create a group of solid “B players.” These are the associates who always produce quality work on time. They might not have the ambition to become top partners, but are essential to satisfying clients. See, eg, “Let's Hear it for the B Players,” Harvard Business Review, June 2003 (DeLong and Vijayaraghavan).

That treatment by partners can significantly influence associate performance is good news for many firms, especially those who hire numerous associates. Most of those associates are not top 10 law school “stars.” Firms invest significant sums in hiring ' large firms with summer associate programs can invest more than $200,000 per hire. If partner attention has the potential to increase the rate of return on that investment, it is worth considering.

How can firms convey the message that stars can be made ' and B players are crucial ' to partners who believe their time is best invested in the unmistakable stars?

Help them to see this issue in economic terms. Run the numbers to determine the amount invested in hiring an associate. How long would it take to recoup that investment at average associate billing, utilization, and realization rates? How long to make a profit? Calculate the average tenure and compare it to the break even and profit points. How much does premature attrition cost? Would informal training extend the average tenure to meet or exceed the break even or profit points? Associates at many firms cite the lack of informal training as a reason for leaving, so it is reasonable to expect that additional informal training could positively impact retention. Given the size of the hiring investment, it is a hypothesis worth testing at most firms.

Discuss hiring and staffing realities. There are not enough stars to meet demand, so when an associate leaves, there is no guarantee that the replacement will be higher quality, or even equal. Most firms need B players to support the stars. Thus, it is usually wise to focus attention on those associates already with the firm and develops their strengths, whether they are stars or B players.

Assure them that the firm's formal training will support their informal efforts (more on that below), and that they are not expected to waste time with associates who are incapable of doing the job. They simply need to treat associates as they were treated, and give them a fair chance at good opportunities even when “star” qualities are not immediately apparent.

Too Many Demands

These partners acknowledge the value of investing in associate development, but demands such as client service and business development usually take priority, especially in light of associate attrition rates. “Why train them, they'll still leave” is a common refrain. They are pleased when a firm establishes formal training programs because they believe those programs will reduce the need for their informal training.

Their individual efforts are still needed, though, so how can this type of partner be persuaded to move associate development up the priority list?

Explain what is in it for them. Help them to see why investing their time in associate development will directly benefit their practice. For example:

• Associates will produce higher quality work;
• The partner will spend less time correcting the same mistakes; and
• The clients will be more satisfied.

Address the concern that associates will eventually leave, so it is not productive to invest in informal training. They need the training to do quality work while at the firm. Further, if associates leave, they often go to work with clients and well-trained, satisfied former associates are likely to strengthen client relationships.

Ensure that associate development efforts are not indirectly discouraged by firm practices. For example, compensation and promotion systems that primarily reward new business generation can encourage partners to focus time there at the expense of associate development and other important firm-building activities.

Everybody's Mentor

If associates could vote, they might select this type of partner as “mentor of the year.” They spend time chatting with associates about their daily work and career aspirations. They organize formal training. They give timely feedback. These partners volunteer for the firm's training, recruiting, and other committees concerned with the people side of the business.

These partners struggle with balancing associate development with client development and other “practice-building” activities, and often devote too much time to associate development at the expense of their practices. Because credibility as a partner is often based on practice success, this threatens their ability to achieve practice and associate development goals.

What can firms do to harness the enthusiasm of these partners for associate development while helping them to develop their practices in economically beneficial ways?

Explicitly encourage balance between associate development efforts and individual practice development. Prevent the firm from taking advantage of their inclination to invest in associate development by ensuring other partners share these responsibilities, eg, by rotating the “team training partner” or work assignment responsibility and having term limits for training committee membership.

Associate development efforts might be undervalued compared to client development because the benefits are harder to quantify. Fight that tendency by developing ways to consider them in setting compensation and determining promotions. Also consider non-monetary ways to recognize their contributions, eg, through leadership positions such as Professional Development Partner or Associate Development Committee Chair.

Supporting Informal Training

Regardless of partners' perspectives on associate development, formal programs can support and leverage their individual efforts. For example, firms can help associates develop essential skills through classroom training in subjects including:

• Legal skills such as client-oriented research, analysis, and writing. Law schools teach these subjects but usually not in ways that stress practicality and efficiency;
• Business concepts such as finance and accounting, to help lawyers speak their clients' language; and
• Practice area knowledge such as taking depositions or drafting contracts.

Firms can also support informal training by offering courses to help partners hone their mentoring, delegation and feedback-giving skills. Associates can be taught how to solicit and use feedback. These management skills are critical to informal training and can be learned, but are rarely taught in law school or law firms. Through this complementary combination of formal and informal training, associates can attain their career goals and firms can improve their return on investment in associates.