I often hear from colleagues about a general discontent in working for a standard law practice and its culture. There is often resentment and politics between the different classes of employees — partners, associates, articling students, law clerks and operation staff. The reason for this discontent is typically due to a perceptive hierarchy that does not reflect practical reality. In order to foster a more positive culture in a law practice, it is the responsibility of the leaders of the firm (ownership group or managing partner) to fracture the perceptive hierarchy and be as transparent has possible as to the firm and its goals.
To demonstrate the disconnect between classes within the perceptive hierarchy, here are a few examples that may seem familiar:
Articling students: They come into friction with clerks who are paralegals — articling students are almost lawyers but have no practical experience; clerks have more experience but cannot act as lawyers.
Associates: They come into friction with partners or more senior associates because they work many more hours and earn less than their contemporaries without understanding why.
Partners: They come into friction with junior associates because they are trying to balance satisfying client expectations and their own billings with taking time to mentor others who are trying to take their place.
Operations staff and associates: Operations staff set procedures for lawyers and clerks to follow to provide accurate reporting to owners for budget and growth initiatives, but this comes into friction with lawyers who satisfy client needs and produce billings that are already pressed for time.
Each of the above are common issues that prevent a law firm from growing creates turnover in staff and clients and is also a cause of burnout and mental health issues in the legal industry.
The best way to combat the above issues is transparency, collaboration and proper incentives. Let’s take just one of the common issues as an example: The disconnect between the articling student (or junior associate) and senior partner. I’ve often heard the same story from junior associates: They are given a task that is outside their competence level and expertise, are given little direction and spend an inordinate of time on the task; the supervisor complains that it took too long, the quality is poor and they cannot bill their client for the hours worked. Often, this leads to resentment and resignation. This can be overcome.
First, leaders of the firm should encourage transparent and open communication between partners, associates, articling students and operational staff. Open communication does not simply mean expressing positive and negative experiences but general transparency on why a goal or task is important to the person junior would go about it. This is crucial because, oftentimes, many clerks or junior associates will spend countless hours that were not needed.
To give another specific example, a task to review due diligence materials in a commercial transaction is an assigned task, but a junior lawyer then creates a spreadsheet itemizing every element that needs to be considered, which (while helpful and a nice touch) is a non-billable waste of resources if not asked for by either lawyer or paying client. Similarly, when the operations team asks lawyers for a list, it would be helpful for operations to explain why this is being asked for and how this benefits the lawyer and the firm as a whole.
In my personal experience, open communication and transparency as to how the assignee ultimately benefits from an assignment is one way to mitigate resentment. This transparency is crucial when it comes to those understanding their place in the practical hierarchy of the firm — a senior lawyer should be transparent upfront as to the clerk’s role, so the student does not take advantage but also be transparent with the clerk to help the student grow.
Second, the promotion of work-life balance has become an increasingly important value of the firm as a whole. Many people who work in the legal industry have no qualms with working overtime or on weekends given the nature of legal services to benefit the clients. That being said, there is a general give and take between these expectations that is appreciated. A real estate clerk will work later hours to ensure closings are completed if they know they can work from home on certain days when closings do not occur. This is more than just a concept that is “trendy”; it is essential to manage stress and prevent burnout. It also forces an appreciation of the hard work between all classes within the firm.
Third, while incentive structures are often the cause of ruthless competition between several classes (this is because many firms maintain a traditional version of a law-firm model), if utilized correctly, like any policy, it points behaviours in the correct direction. Many law firms operate on a partnership model — people are rewarded based on the sheer amount of time they spend on clients or based on business development and compete for a particular track. However, this is not the case for most growing businesses which offer bonuses based on individual or corporate success.
Creating group or individual custom plans that properly incentivize lawyers and non-lawyers alike are crucial for ensuring correct behaviours. A small example of this is related to docketing — if incentive structures are put into place to ensure a lawyer is docketing their time and files correctly, it will force operational staff to work with lawyers to properly report their activities in order to obtain financial incentives. Lawyers will understand the importance of data entry (which they do not care about) and back office operations, through the act of going through client data, will learn more about lawyers’ cases and pain points.
Lastly, while easier said than done, efforts should be made to create a collaborative culture. This does not just mean firm events or team-building activities, which, while helpful, should be more than token dates to put into a calendar. Instead, internal communications of the goals and future of the firm should consistently remind everyone of the correct direction and will reinforce the reasons for coming to work every day and promotion of teamwork. This is similar to open communication in the first point but comes from leadership to the firm as a whole: Why is your firm any different than any other? Why should members work as a team? What benefit does that serve to the firm and clients?
The discontent within law firms is a complex issue rooted in the hierarchical nature of the industry. By fostering open communication, promoting work-life balance, creating proper incentive structures and cultivating a collaborative culture, law firms can create a more harmonious and productive work environment. Addressing these issues is not just about improving employee satisfaction but also about ensuring the long-term success and sustainability of the firm.
