Grading the Teacher: Associate Evaluations of Partner Performance

• Publication year: 2004
• Pages: 35

33 Colo.Law. 35 Colorado Lawyer 2004.

2004, March, Pg. 35. Grading the Teacher: Associate Evaluations of Partner Performance

---

35

Vol. 33, No. 3, Pg. 35

The Colorado Lawyer
March 2004
Vol. 33, No. 3 [Page 35]

Departments
Law Practice Management
Grading the Teacher: Associate Evaluations of Partner Performance
by Marian L. Carlson

Readers interested in submitting an article for this Department should contact Laura Breaker, (303) 996-8822 or laura breaker@aol.com; Sheldon Friedman, (303) 292-5656 or sfriedman@irwl.com; or Denise L. Saathoff, (970) 226-5524 or saathofflaw@attbi.com

Marian Carlson is a consultant specializing in attorney training and professional development. Before starting her consulting firm, Carlson Performance Strategies, Carlson practiced law for fifteen years as a commercial litigator in Denver. She can be reached through her website http://www.carlsonperformancestrategies.com

Mention the concept of associates evaluating partners - often referred to as "upward evaluations" - and you will get a variety of reactions. From lawyers and administrators in large firms, you will see recognition and hear comments ranging from an enthusiastic "We use upward evaluations - they're a wonderful tool" to a low-key "We've considered them, but they wouldn't work at our firm." Among those working in medium-sized firms, you might find a few who have heard of them. Most of these people have never considered using such a process, but can quickly identify several drawbacks to it. Others may look at you as if you're from another planet.

Over the past few months, I have spoken with partners, associates, and administrators at a number of Denver-based law firms, as well as law firm recruiters and professional development directors at a national conference, about their firms' receptivity to upward evaluations. Only one Denver-based firm has incorporated upward reviews into its annual performance evaluations.1 Although the survey was not scientific, it is safe to say upward evaluations are not commonplace here.

Most partners recognize the value of feedback in improving the performance of associates who work for them. They may even concede that peer feedback could improve their own performance as managers. However, some cringe at the notion. This article explores the nature of upward evaluations, the possible roots of these adverse reactions, and the pros and cons of conducting such evaluations. A sample evaluation form is provided as an appendix.

The Nature of Upward Evaluations

Upward evaluations stem from the concept of multi-source or "360-degree" performance appraisals, a practice that gained popularity in the corporate world during the 1990s.2 Through this process, a performer is evaluated not only by his or her direct supervisor, but by subordinates, team members, peers, internal customers, and external customers as well. Although the details of the process vary by organization, the person being assessed generally selects a number of coworkers (called "raters") to participate in the feedback process. Working individually, the raters submit information through either a written form or an online system about the manager's skills and behaviors as related to managerial or leadership effectiveness within the organization.

Many companies find multi-source evaluations a cost-effective way to help managers take an honest look at their strengths and weaknesses, as viewed from several perspectives. The theory is that, through data gathered from a variety of sources, a reliable picture of the performer emerges that is more resistant to the biases and distortions that can result from personal conflicts and favoritism.

In recent years, an increasing number of law firms nationwide have begun using multi-source evaluations, including "upward reviews," by which associates review partners on their management skills.3 The trend gained momentum in the late 1990s as law firms looked for strategies to retain associates, who were leaving in droves.4 According to a 1998 study by the National Association for Law Placement ("NALP"), the primary factors affecting associates' decisions to stay or leave were the amount of feedback they received, quality of attorney management, availability of mentoring, amount of communication with the partnership, and the unspoken firm policy on the balance of law practice and life.5 In a roundtable discussion at a Professional Development Institute in December 2003, nationally-recognized consultant Susan Manch estimated that approximately 30 to 35 percent of the nation's larger law firms now conduct upward evaluations, compared with approximately 15 percent in 2000.

In the...