Feature

posted 16 Feb 2005 in Volume 7 Issue 8

Motivating the troops: Using research into generational differences to improve performance

It is easy enough to survey partner attitudes or associate well-being in a particular firm or even in a specific region or country. But Karen MacKay, a consultant at Edge International, has gone further with an international outlook. In a survey conducted in association with global law-firm network Multilaw, MacKay has found varying attitudes between partners and associates of different generations and countries. She explains her findings in more detail in this first part of a series of articles to be published in Managing Partner.

Can we motivate others? Probably not. The right people are motivated from within. However, the right law-firm environment can foster motivation. The wrong environment can neutralise or even extinguish it. This article is based on research, which aims to assist senior management in breaking the code of cultural and generational differences to create an appropriate environment for peak performance and high satisfaction.

In a business where the firm’s primary assets arrive each morning and leave every night, attracting, motivating and retaining talent is critical. In Good to Great1, author Jim Collins says organisations need to think “first who – then what”. This prompts the question: can we create and sustain an environment where the right people (first who) can develop their legal expertise individually and collectively (then what) to deliver competitive advantage?

This task is not assisted by the trend toward portability. As author Tom Peters says: “Even outstanding performers do not anticipate staying with one organisation for their entire career and are always working with the knowledge, at least in the background, that their current position is temporary2.”

My research goal was to get inside the hearts and minds of lawyers around the world. While there were some existing national surveys of lawyers done in the US, UK and Australia, there was no global study that would overlay cultural differences on generational differences.

We were curious about what lawyers working in private practice aspire to and what motivates them. We were curious about what rewards them and what they need to do to develop as professionals.

Who responded

Over the summer of 2004, in collaboration with the member firms of Multilaw, a leading global network of independent law firms, we surveyed partners and associates worldwide. (Findings were presented at Multilaw’s AGM and this article is published with their permission.)

Seventy-four per cent of the partners who responded to our survey were born during the post WWII baby boom between 1946 and 1964. Demographers have described this group as idealistic, revolutionary, highly competitive and driven by money.

Seventy-one per cent of the associates who responded were born between 1965 and 1980 – crowned by demographers as Generation X. This demographic group is described as independent, sceptical and resourceful. There is no right or wrong in these two generations – they just see the world differently.

We asked associates to rank the following 17 motivators in terms of their importance, from ‘extremely important’ to ‘not important at all’:

1.         Security;
2.         Status;
3.         Being a member of a team;
4.         Time for personal life;
5.         Relationship with mentor;
6.         Professional growth;
7.         Opportunities for advancement;
8.         Intrinsic nature of the work;
9.         Recognition;
10.       Autonomy;
11.       Opportunity to develop own clientele;
12.       Effective management of their firm;
13.       Leadership;
14.       Corporate social responsibility;
15.       Social contribution of work;
16.       Financial reward;
17.       Achievement.

We also asked partners how they thought the associates with whom they worked most closely would rank the same list. There was a difference – and it was fascinating.

Also significant were the differences in the needs of associates in different geographic regions, which in our study comprised the US, South America, UK/Europe and Asia/Pacific.

Time for personal life, professional growth, advancement (to partnership) and security were identified as extremely important and were the top four motivators, as ranked by associates worldwide. These four are now examined in detail.

Topping the list: Time

Time for personal life ranked as extremely important to 44.44 per cent of the respondents worldwide. One in three associates in the US cited time for a personal life as extremely important, with 73 per cent telling us that their targets are 1,800 billable hours per year or more and pushing higher. The extreme importance placed on time for personal life may simply be a reaction to the ever-increasing hours required by US law firms, and could be a lesson to firms in other regions. As one respondent put it: “My firm changed its rules since I started working here. First, there was a 1,900 hour goal and then it became the rule. Now, making 1,900 is the minimum and you should make 2,100... Now firm management has decided to implement a requirement of at least 2,500 hrs dedicated to the firm. This means that we are now supposed to bill not less than 1,900 (if possible more) plus another 600 hrs of practice development, CLE courses and other things to promote the firm. How can one have a life or even be productive if you cannot take a vacation and when you must work 10-12 hours every day, plus pretty much every other weekend of the year, to be able to achieve these goals?”

In the UK, Europe and Asia-Pacific, billable targets in the respondent firms appear to be more manageable. The vast majority have billable targets between 1,400 and 1,600 hours. While time is still very important to associates in those regions as they balance their personal and professional lives, they are more interested than their US counterparts in professional growth, achievement, security and advancement to partnership – perhaps because their billable targets are manageable.

When partners were asked how important time for personal life was to the associates with whom they worked most closely, only one in five ranked it as extremely important compared to 1 in 2.4 associates worldwide.

Developing as professionals

Professional growth came in second, ranked extremely important by 37 per cent of associates around the globe and extremely important by only 26 per cent of partners. In fact, firms are doing a very good job of providing associates with consistently challenging work according to 66 per cent of the associates who responded.

Meaningful delegation and challenging work remain key motivators of talented young lawyers. While this is where partners and associates were most closely aligned, it can be difficult for many senior lawyers to make it a reality.

Our fondness for giving or receiving feedback is very different depending on our demographic. For senior partners who are still in your firm, but who were born before 1945, no news is good news. For about 74 per cent of the partners in firms today, who were born between 1946 and 1965, feedback is an annual ritual that justifies a pay rise, bonus, or both. At worst, the annual feedback ritual brings a message to leave the firm – sometimes out of left field. They are uncomfortable with feedback, but it can be a means to an end.

Here’s what one associate said: “I never get any feedback, except at annual performance reviews. Even then, the feedback is worthless because the partners give their feedback anonymously.” Partnerships design feedback processes that they, the partners, are comfortable with. Partners who are uncomfortable getting feedback are unlikely to to want to give it and therefore go to great lengths to make it anonymous.

For the vast majority of associates in law firms today, feedback is an indication that someone cares about their development as professionals – about their future. One associate said: “I rarely get feedback. It is frustrating to have a mentor that does not seem to care about my future in the firm.” I suspect the partners in his or her firm care deeply about their firm and their younger colleagues. I also think the partner/mentor probably does care about this associate’s future, but each approaches feedback from their own bias.

For many partners, their experience with feedback as a young professional was fairly judgemental. Younger professionals today see it differently. “Scheduling of formal feedback is not the important element, it is more important to know if the work performed is in accord with expectations at various stages of my professional development. So ‘ongoing’ means as I grow and take on new responsibilities, feedback is provided to guide me.”

The question of partnership

Opportunity for advancement is extremely important to 34 per cent of the respondents worldwide. According to our study, advancement and achievement are most important to young lawyers in the Asia-Pacific region.

When we asked if partnership was attainable, almost 90 per cent of all associates said yes, while just less than 80 per cent said partnership was desirable. When we asked

if partnership was equally available to all associates in the firm, only 52 per cent said yes. Partners had a more optimistic view as illustrated in the graph in figure one; however, this leads us to another important issue.

This is where women feel they have to choose between family and partnership. As one individual put it: “I have to choose between a career and a family. Making partner may no longer be an option that is workable.” This is one of the reasons why the gender split among our survey respondents of 45 per cent of women to 55 per cent to men among associates becomes 23 per cent of women to 77 per cent of men among the partner ranks. Does it make sense for this to continue? Can firms continue to lose this significant investment in talent?

Former McKinsey partner Tom Peters said in his most recent book, Re-imagine: “There is a great war for talent. Great talent is in short supply. And the supply will get even shorter … as the age of creativity and intellectual capital accelerates. And accelerate it will. So can we afford to ignore half [women] (or, to be precise, slightly more than half) of our store of potential great talent?” If we cannot fit their needs into the law-firm business model profitably, we’ll lose a very big investment. Making women happy alumni won’t be enough.

To many, partnership means, among other things, increased financial reward. When asked if partnership is attainable, one respondent said: “...it is probably attainable, however, I am not interested in becoming a partner of a law firm. I would rather earn less money and have a life.” For some, partnership is akin to winning a pie-eating contest where the prize is more pie.

While money has never been on the top of any list of motivators, associates in our survey ranked financial reward as tenth on a list of seventeen. Partners who responded thought that associates would rank financial reward as third. Who raised associate salaries in response to the hot legal job market in the 1990s? How are firms paying for these high salaries? Of course, it is with increased billable hours.

Rounding out the top four – job security

The final motivator in our top four is security. Perhaps because of complicated political and economic times, or perhaps because of the relentless downsizing and restructuring of corporations worldwide. Whatever the reasons, a secure future is an extremely important motivator to more than one in three associates who responded.

Will firms change with the next generation?

When 70 per cent of the partners in law firms today are card-carrying members of the baby boom, things have changed to accommodate the values and motivators of that demographic. This is the group who moved their firms from hierarchy (that was accepted by the generation before them) to consensus- driven democracies. This is the group that moved their firms from lock-step compensation to the various forms of meritocracies that exist today. This is a group driven by achievement, status and money. Will firms be changed by generation X as they were by the baby boom? Wait a few years and we’ll see.

The challenge

The challenge for law-firm leaders is to create a shared vision among the partnership that provides a compelling value proposition to the next generation coming into the firm and indeed the partnership. One managing partner told me recently that one of his greatest challenges is to resolve the tension between partners who want to “strip-mine the firm every year” and those who want to “invest in the future”. Combine that tension with the issues across the generations (who simply see the world differently) and the leadership challenge becomes much more complex.

When asked if they were satisfied with their overall experience with their firm, 66 per cent of associates indicated that they were, compared to 79 per cent of partners who responded. We congratulate the member firms of Multilaw for taking the lead in investigating these important issues.

The more we dig through the data, the more fascinated I become. The differences between the two prevalent generations in law firms today will continue to provide challenges to law-firm leaders for the foreseeable future. In a world where lawyers can cross borders and find opportunities virtually anywhere on the planet, these issues take on huge importance.

References

1. Collins, J., Good to Great, published by Harper Business, 2001

2. Peters, T., Re-imagine! Business Excellence in a Disruptive Age, published by Dorling Kindersley, 2003

Karen MacKay, MBA, is a partner at Edge International. She can be contacted at mackay@edge.ai