In this naughty article, Above the Law has somehow gotten hold of real performance reviews from a US legal firm and published the redacted results.
As a company who work closely with legal firms on performance management and appraisal, I thought I would add my observations to those already made in the article:
- Feedback from junior colleagues is included in the performance appraisals. This is critical for developing leaders in the Associate group.
- Feedback seems to be exclusively free-text, apart from the final rating.
- The Rating scale seems to have been designed to sound positive; this will typically be re-interpreted as Exceeds, Meets or Doesn't meet expectations.
- It's great to see a Career Development Plan included in the appraisal, as well as recommendations on training.
- What's missing for me is:
1. structured consistent feedback based on particular areas that all Associates should be measured on: the lack of a structure to the feedback means that both Partners and junior colleagues will tend to generalise their feedback and only remember, and note, what already fits with their views of the Associate.
2. Self-assessment: this may be part of the appraisal, but it has not been shown here. Some form of structured self-appraisal forces the individual to do some reflection, however basic, on their own performance, and then to be able to compare this with the feedback from others.
Any comments from practitioners in this area are welcome!