Hogan Lovells scraps 'broken' review system for associates
Firm rolls out new programme directing associates to proactively seek performance feedback from partners and other colleagues throughout the year
April 12, 2018 at 09:59 AM
4 minute read
Hogan Lovells is overhauling the way it provides feedback to associates as it looks to adapt to the shifting expectations of younger lawyers.
The transatlantic firm is scrapping its annual review-based approach after spending 18 months testing different methods at its offices around the world.
Rather than relying on annual performance reports to deliver feedback, the firm has worked with consultants to create a new programme dubbed 'Pathways', which directs associates to proactively seek input from partners and other colleagues about their performance throughout the year.
The programme has been rolled out across Hogan Lovells' global offices, and the firm said it will expand the initiative to include the firm's business services staff next year.
"When it came time to make important decisions – who should be advanced, who should become a partner – we never went back and read the reports, because they were in a sense detached from the process of managing development," said Steve Immelt, the firm's Washington DC-based CEO. "We thought the system we had was broken in a number of respects and not really delivering what our people needed and wanted."
Immelt acknowledged that the shift would require some adjustments for lawyers accustomed to the old system. "Even saying that the old system was broken didn't mean that this was the right solution," he said. "This does change the approach, and we all know how lawyers don't like things to change, so we wanted to be sure this was going to be an approach people would adapt and pick up."
One of the biggest differences under the new programme involves something the firm has labelled "flash feedback". Allison Friend, the firm's chief HR officer in the Americas, said the flash feedback component requires associates to get three pieces of feedback from colleagues every four months. Friend said the exercise prompts associates to identify trends related to what others in the firm are working on, and cultivates more dialogue and engagement between lawyers.
Friend said the decision to shift the firm's approach was was not motivated by similar moves by competitors, but a number of other top law firms have begun changing their practices in recent years.
Seeking constant performance evaluations is a characteristic of millennial lawyers that many firms have identified, and Hogan Lovells is making changes as firms everywhere are looking to cater to a younger demographic in their recruitment and development efforts.
Slaughter and May recently overhauled its associate appraisal system, with performance scores replaced by more ongoing feedback and mentoring by dedicated 'continuity' partners, while Baker McKenzie dropped annual appraisals and performance ratings for all fee earners and staff at the end of the 2016-17 financial year.
Hogan Lovells declined to comment on the precise tools that would be used for the Pathways programme, but noted that it was developed in consultation with hundreds of the firm's lawyers and with the input of IDEO, a global design company. The firm said the programme would not directly feed into decisions about bonuses, other compensation, or partner promotions.
"Pathways is focused on growth and development, not compensation. We've separated the feedback process from conversations about compensation," Friend said. "As to partnership, it doesn't determine who is on a partnership track. However, we do talk regularly with associates in the programme about what paths they want to take, including partnership."
Whatever effect the new programme has on Hogan Lovells' development and retention of associates, Immelt said he hopes it will give everyone at the firm a better sense of how they fit into its business.
"You find in the law firm setting that people have very high expectations, and are very demanding, but there's not only a reluctance at times to give constructive feedback, but also a reluctance to give positive feedback," Immelt said. "So by trying to change that rhythm… it's just another way we as a firm are trying to adapt to a modern workplace with a modern group of associates, who have different expectations than I had many years ago when I was a young associate."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHengeler Advises On €7B Baltica 2 Wind Farm Deal Between Ørsted and PGE
2 minute readA&O Shearman To Lose Another Five Lawyers, Including Madrid Practice Head, to EY
3 minute readRosenblatt Breaks Away From RBG, Becomes 40-Strong Standalone Firm
Trending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250