PROMOTED BY NAIMAN CLARKEW e were recently speaking with a senior (non-partner) lawyer. She was telling us how difficult it was to motivate the junior to mid-level lawyers in her team because although several non-partner lawyers were providing these lawyers with positive re-enforcement, what these lawyers were really seeking was some acknowledgement of good work, or constructive feedback, from the partner. Both millennials and Gen Z want the learning curve that comes with good feedback, and to be recognised when they have performed well, worked long hours, or have gone above and beyond in some other way. What partners aren’t realising is that the top thing that Millennials want costs them nothing at all.
An article published in Forbes not long ago noted that Employer Approval is the number one predictor of Millennial job satisfaction, however only around 40% are getting it (and we suspect it is much less than that in law). Essentially in law, it’s likely that 7-8 out of 10 Millennials aren’t getting the one thing they want from their time at work. Unfortunately, our experience is that many partners don’t put much stock in positive reinforcement. “Praise” feels forced. Anecdotally very many lawyers have said to us “you know when you AREN’T doing a good job but doing a great job is just assumed”. However, many senior lawyers aren’t realising that positive reinforcement is a terrific teaching tool that addresses the widely accepted principal that desirable behaviour when positively reinforced has a tendency to be repeated. In practice what that means that if a lawyer does something you want replicated, giving them a clear message that is meaningful, specific, timely and not provided alongside criticism will be good for everyone.
There is certainly a generally held view that Millennials have grown up in an era where everyone got a participation ribbon and a trophy just for putting on a uniform. But in reality, the good and great performing millennials (these are the overachievers which make up the large proportion of the legal millennial community) actually hated when everyone got a reward. They don’t want empty praise; they want meaningful feedback that will allow them to grow, develop and learn and they desire that feedback regularly.
Sadly, the performance appraisal system formally set up in most firms, doesn’t suit the millennial mindset. Unlike Gen X which from a work perspective was a “set and forget” group who would be grateful for some feedback once a year, the Millennials and Gen Z are built differently.
Firstly, both Millennials and Gen Z have grown up with social media and appreciate public displays of positive reinforcement such as LinkedIn posts, mentions on internal group emails and so on. Secondly, what they crave is regular feedback sessions (say quarterly) where they have a clear growth plan, laying out of expectations, what they have done extremely well, and so on. Unlike the once-a-year review where both positive and negative aspects are discussed, the millennial view is that there is a place and time for constructive criticism and that is not at the same time as providing a positive message. Many partners faced with the once a year review make the mistake of trying to squeeze in some unfavourable performance critique between layers of positive reinforcement. We also hear the partners complaining about what a laborious job it is to prepare for these yearly reviews. So maybe the yearly review isn’t right for anyone anymore?
This leads us to the subject of constructive criticism. Constructive criticism is generally viewed as being done poorly by leaders in all fields. The only purpose of constructive criticism is to improve performance. It needs to be specific and provide a clear message of how something could have been done better. Research suggests that where employees believe they receive constructive feedback that improves performance most of the time, they are eight times more likely to recommend their firm as a great employer and this will obviously assist with employee retention and attracting talent in a competitive market.
The reality for most firms is that they could have the most expansive and well researched employee retention strategies in place, the most meaningful statements about culture and leadership, however, unless the partners are practising meaningful employee retention strategies regularly, employee retention will not be where it should be. Perhaps law firms should start thinking about giving these generational groups the one thing they really crave!
Prepared by Elvira Naiman and Kristina Steele
