Performance Management in
the Professions 2015: research
and findings
David Meagher
Head of Analytics
Research purpose
To benchmark current performance management practice in
the PSF sector
To understand priorities for change in relation to performance
management practices, tools and methods
Researchers
Ray D’Cruz, SkillsScorecard, Australia
Michael Roch, KermaPartners, UK
Rupprecht Graf von Pfiel, KermaPartners, Germany
Richard Chaplin, Managing Partners Forum, UK
Respondent demographics
N=240
Strategic context
Performance management is
central to productivity
Clients
More certainty
Lower costs
 Identifying, engaging, rewarding and
retaining the most profitable and productive
partners and staff
 Managing poor performance
Profit margin squeeze
Employee
significant
salary
expectations
Parters
significant
profit
expectations
 Accelerating skills development and
behaviours (particularly in client focused
capabilities such as pricing, commerciality
and cost consciousness)
 Systematic approach to nurturing a culture
of continuous improvement and process reengineering through structured learning
and KM
 Promoting new talent with future-oriented
capabilities
Preliminary findings
1. Firms want more regular formal and informal conversations
2. The US-led debate about PM is off the mark
3. Honest feedback is the most important outcome of PM
4. Developing partner and manager skills is a priority
5. Project-based feedback is seriously lacking in law firms
6. Financial metrics are still skewed to personal financials
7. HR needs to take its seat at the partner PM table
8. Technology is the enabler for streamlined PM
Research methods
Finding #1
Firms want more regular
formal and informal
performance conversations
Frequency of formal reviews
Current versus desired
Questions: “How often is FORMAL
feedback (periodic review) provided
on performance or progress?” and
“How often in your personal opinion
should FORMAL feedback (periodic
review) be provided on performance
or progress?”
Size of bubble corresponds to the y
axis and indicates the % of
respondents choosing a given option.
Frequency of informal feedback
Current versus desired
Questions: “How often is INFORMAL
feedback provided on performance
or progress?” and “How often in your
personal opinion should INFORMAL
feedback be provided on
performance or progress?”
Size of bubble corresponds to the y
axis and indicates the % of
respondents choosing a given
option.
Research methods
Finding #2
The US-led debate about
performance management is
off the mark
US focus on forced rankings and ratings is
largely irrelevant for Australian PSFs
Trend line: respondents
tend to agree on where
priorities lie
Question: “What are your
priorities for improving the
periodic review process in
the coming 1-2 years?”
Research methods
Finding #3
Honest feedback is the most
important outcome of
performance management
Honest feedback the most important
outcome of performance management
Question: “How important are
the following aspects of
performance management at
your firm?”
Research methods
Finding #4
Developing partner and
manager skills is the most
important priority for firms
Skills: improving partner and manager skills
through training is the number one priority
Trend line: respondents
tend to agree on where
priorities lie
Question: “What are your
priorities for improving
the periodic review
process in the coming 1-2
years?”
Research methods
Finding #5
Project or matter-based
feedback is seriously lacking,
especially for law firms
After action reviews: a critical productivity
improvement tool missing in action
Question: “How
consistently is
performance reviewed
at the end of each job,
project or
engagement?”
X axis indicates % of
respondents choosing
a given option.
Law
Accounting
All other
UK
Australia
All other
<250
250-500
500-1000
>1000
Discussion
Why are after action reviews so important given the
challenges facing law firms?
Why is the use of after action reviews in Australian law firms
so lacking?
What can L&D do to change the current state?
Research methods
Finding #6
Performance assessment is
still skewed to personal
financial metrics
Key inputs in performance assessment need to
be broadened beyond personal financials
Question: “What are the main inputs for periodic reviews of partners,
employees, management team members?” (respectively)
Research methods
Finding #7
HR must take a seat at the
table for partner PM by
building credibility
Role of HR in designing and implementing
partner performance reviews
HR point of view
Owner point of view
HR involvement in the periodic
review process for partners
remains very limited – yet more
important is the difference in
perception between owner and
HRD.
Question: “How closely is HR
currently involved in the design
and implementation of periodic
reviews?”
Use of performance analytics: gaining
credibility through data-based insights
25.4%
22.5%
30.3%
36.6%
35.2%
Part of how we work +
Regularly, The firm as a
whole, 40.8%
Sometimes, The firm as
a whole, 31.0%
Part of how we work +
Regularly, Business units
and teams, 35.2%
Sometimes, Business
units and teams, 39.4%
Part of how we work +
Regularly, Individual
partners, 38.0%
Sometimes, Individual
partners, 28.2%
Sometimes, Individual
employees, 28.2%
Part of how we work +
Regularly, Individual
employees, 32.4%
Sometimes, The
management team,
28.2%
Part of how we work +
Regularly, The
management team,
31.7%
Not part of how we work + Rarely
Sometimes
Part of how we work + Regularly
Performance analytics - the
application and analysis of
data to produce actionable
insights about people and
performance.
Question: “To what extent are
performance analytics (HR
reporting, data visualisation,
etc.) used in discussions over
performance of?”
Research methods
Finding #8
Technology is the enabler to
make the process
easier
for everyone
Skills: improving partner and manager skills
through training is the number one priority
Trend line: respondents
tend to agree on where
priorities lie
Question: “What are your
priorities for improving
the periodic review
process in the coming 1-2
years?”
Research methods
Best practice:
where to from here?
Preliminary findings
1. Firms want more regular formal and informal conversations
2. The US-led debate about PM is off the mark
3. Honest feedback is the most important outcome of PM
4. Developing partner and manager skills is a priority
5. Project-based feedback is seriously lacking in law firms
6. Financial metrics are still skewed to personal financials
7. HR needs to take its seat at the partner PM table
8. Technology is the enabler for streamlined PM
Future of performance management
Traditional approach
Future approaches
Annual formal reviews
Quarterly / six monthly formal reviews
Assessment focused
Dialogue focused
Periodic collection of feedback
Just-in-time project-based feedback
Annually updated objectives
Ongoing objectives updates
Single source feedback
Multi source feedback
Paper-based, bureaucratic form-filling
Online, simple and intuitive systems
Personal financial metrics
Personal and team financial metrics
Personal competency focus
Team competency focus
Narrow focus on outputs
Balancing inputs and outputs
Opaque compensation process
Transparent compensation process
Compliance focused
Business intelligence, analytics focus
HR driven
Supervisor, employee and HR driven
Best practice framework
Adjust leadership approach
Designate performance
management as the key link
between positioning, strategy
and behaviour
Evolve ways of working
Adjust
leadership
approach
Tightly link business planning,
performance management and
remuneration processes to for
effectiveness and efficiency
Make it important: establish
good practices in your firm‘s
DNA; hold people accountable
Improve participant skills in as
coaching, feedback, objectiveconsensus and decisionmaking
Increase frequency of formal and
informal conversations; praise
good performance and use
strengths-based dialogue
Increase
use of
technology
Evolve
ways of
working
Engage senior HR in partner
performance management
Review contribution areas and
ratings for l appropriateness (be
nuanced if necessary)
Abolish forced rankings
Broaden and balance what
performance measures
Increase / improve use of technology
Save time; replace manual processes with technology
Streamline and simplify existing technology
Build HR’s analytics capabilities (and in doing so improve
HR profile and credibility)
Implement after action reviews as
routine business practice
Research methods
Conclusion
Firms want evolution;
more formal and informal
performance conversations,
kept short and simple, and
enabled by technology
Questions?
Performance Management in the Professions
2015: research and findings
David Meagher
Head of Analytics
[email protected]