What Law Firms Can Do to Upgrade Their ‘Zoom Associates’

Law firm partners are concerned about “Zoom associates”— those lawyers who came into the profession during and shortly after the pandemic—and whether some have skill deficiencies, industry observers have said. This has exacerbated associates’ tension with partners, which was already simmering because of generational differences and after-effects of the pandemic.

So what should law firms do to address skill deficiencies and tensions between partners and associates?

“[Firms] have to [address it … the frustrations] in a setting where the majority is there … and create an environment where you have conversations,” said Heather McCullough, a partner and co-founder of Society54, a consulting firm.

Attorney leadership coach Lauren Krasnow said two things firms can do to make their associates better—faster—are focusing on improving their writing skills and frequent 1:1 meetings with partners.

She said training associates on their writing skills, particularly on how to write emails and letters to clients and partners, has a high return on investment.

“The associates’ realization rates will be higher (i.e., fewer write-offs), and partners and clients won’t waste time reading things that don’t get to the point quickly,” she wrote in an email.

Meanwhile, frequent check-ins with partners have two benefits, Krasnow said.

“First, consistency builds relationships, which per extensive research, is a huge driver of engagement and thus contribution,” she wrote. “Second, the work product is better: associates ask more questions when the artificial threshold of the perennial ‘Is this question too dumb for me to reach out to this partner to ask it,’ is removed. Getting rid of that hurdle by having a routine time/venue to ask it means associates will in fact ask more questions, in real time, and thus produce better work product.”

Noah Heller, chief executive officer of Katten, cited communication as well to improve partner and associate rapport and said his firm has even used outside speakers.

“We have brought in outside speakers on generational differences to speak with our practice group leaders,” Heller wrote in an email response to a written question. “We also encourage our partners to initiate conversations when these issues arise, with curiosity and a willingness to learn. These days, leadership takes patience and an open mind.”

McCullough said firms should also create opportunities for the associates to “get them to flex different muscles.”

She recounted how she worked with a firm and they created teams based on the number of years at the firm. The most creative ideas came from people who had been at the firm fewer years, she said. In the end, the management team liked some of those ideas, she added.

What Is Expected

Krasnow said one issue law firm leaders should consider is how well have they defined their expectations for associates. Many firms fail to do that, she said.

“In my experience, most senior leaders do a good job of articulating values and expectations, but there’s often internal inconsistency in the execution: expectations for availability, billables, level of communication, whatever, vary, sometimes widely, by group or by individual partner,” Krasnow said.

“Bottom line: There’s a real opportunity here for leaders. I’m confident that deft, humble and bold leadership can resolve this generational challenge. It’s not easy, but it’s doable,” she added.

 

Is Being in the Office the Answer?

As for whether office attendance will make a difference, more than a few law firm leaders and consultants are skeptical. Some have even predicted it will backfire.

“I do not think regular office attendance will change the issue,” said Michael Ferachi, managing member of Louisiana-based McGlinchey Stafford. “The [generational] differences will occur whether they are in the office or not.”

Plus, said Jeff Lowe, founder and managing partner of advisory firm Jeffrey Lowe Partners, younger lawyers aren’t the only ones pushing back against strict office mandates.

“I just don’t believe you’re going to get some partners and senior partners sitting in an office again. Ever,” he said.

So what should firms do?

Although some firms have directly tied bonuses to attendance, others are using additional, more subjective criteria as factors in pay and advancement decisions for partners and senior associates.

Those factors can include responsiveness, client service and yes, mentoring and training—things that demonstrate what Paul Schmidt of Baker & Hostetler called an “ownership mentality.”

Ferachi said his firm has the members “talk to the associates…and find out what drives them” and encourages the associates to talk to the members and understand what drives them as well.

Some associates want to turn off the practice of law after business hours, he said. But client problems don’t always come up between 9-5.

“It does come down to communication,” Ferachi said.

Schmidt said recognizing differences in communication remains a challenge. He noted that the pace of practice has increased considerably with technology and that older lawyers are still adjusting.

“It may not seem like a big thing, but we have to recognize that younger lawyers feel more connected through chats and text chains. We as teachers and mentors have to, in some ways, not just expect everyone to adapt to our style but also adapt to their style,” he said. “So that is one challenge.”

The communication also has to be intentional, Ferachi added, not just from partners to associates, but also from leadership to the partners. But do those conversations work?

“I do see it pay off,” he said. “Does it pay off every time? It doesn’t always work, but for the most part, it works.”

But Ferachi added that if the partners don’t want to have those conversations with the associates, the ”associates become unavailable to them or they leave.