About Bruce
Search this site:


Subscribe to E-Mail Updates
About the SiteAbout Adam Smith Adam Smith, Esq. Newsletter Adam Smith, Esq. Newsletter

April 30, 2007

Do You Know What Your Associates Think?

From HBS's Working Knowledge, in an article entitled "Do I Dare Say Something?"

"Perhaps most surprising to us has been the degree to which fear appears to be a feature of modern work life. Whenever we talk with others about this work, such as on airplanes with strangers, we get a similar response—"Oh yeah, I can relate to wanting to speak up but biting my tongue."

"It's really a shame how much apparently untapped knowledge there is out there and how much pain and frustration results from this silence. That, too, has been somewhat surprising—that people are genuinely hurt and frustrated about their silence. This suggests that employees aren't failing to provide ideas or input because they've "checked out" and just don't care, but because of fear."

If you're remotely like me, doesn't this strikes you as a compelling reflection of tragic reality in too many firms?

Let's try to get behind the causes of this and propose some remedial measures.  And as we do, I'd like to suggest you keep in mind the peculiarly intense need for feedback and engagement from your youngest associates, the famous Gen Y'ers. 

Here's the background to the kick-off quote:  Harvard Business School professor Amy Edmondson and Penn State professor James Detert explored the challenges employees face speaking up to internal authorities.  They coined the term "latent voice episodes" to describe moments when someone considers speaking up—with the emphasis on "up," as in up to someone higher on the organizational food chain—and they surmise that whether or not an underling chooses to voice their observation, insight, or suggestion, depends on: (a) innate personality differences and (b) context.

So far, no surprise.  Some people are naturally more extroverted than others, and therefore more likely to speak up, and organizational context matters tremendously as well:  Do senior partners walk around and engage associates and staff spontaneously?  Are there regular and formalized ways of sharing information about the firm?  Videoconferences from the Managing Partner or executive committee, quarterly "all-hands" memo's, or regular departmental meetings, with Q&A?

Our good professors also speculate thus:

"Even from an evolutionary point of view, it seems we're all hard-wired to overestimate rather than underestimate certain types of risk—it was better (for survival) to "flee" too often from threats that weren't really there than to not flee the one time there was a significant risk. So, we've inherited emotional and cognitive mechanisms that motivate us to avoid perceived risks to our psychological and material well-being."

I wouldn't go quite so far, at least in attributing risk-aversion to evolutionary selection.  (Truth be told, as life-altering an experience as it was to read The Selfish Gene 25 years or so ago, I now have come to the view that mapping every human behavior back towards our experience on the primordial savannah is a bridge way too far.)

But:  As far as individual proclivities along the spectrum ranging from the instinct to speak up or to stand silent, lawyers are surely at the extreme end in the stand-silent crowd.  We are, after all, taught to be risk-averse, and if you say nothing, you can't be criticized.  (Well, it's a lot harder, in any case.)  Associates have done this cost-benefit in their head, consciously or subconsciously, and placed their bets.   Can we do anything about this?  No, in a word.

And before we let partners off the hook, consider that any conversation involves at least two interlocutors.  Partners who are abrupt, truculent, holier-than-Thou, or simply—and in my experience these are the most subtle and most devastating offenders—so sublimely trained in the adversarial arts that they can't resist any opportunity, however inappropriate, to "win" a conversation do far more to short-circuit these potentially valuable opportunities for subordinates to speak up than any associate's hesitance possibly could achieve.

What we can do is work on changing the cultural context, to encourage more speaking up. How do you change a culture?  The professors readily confess, "It's difficult!", and confirm that they've yet to encounter a single organization in their research that "has fully transformed itself from one of fear to one in which most employees would rate the organization as open or conducive to speaking up."

Is this the Managing Partner's job?  Yes, but it's the job of all of senior, visible management.  The most important single factor influencing cultural openness to speaking up is:  Leader behavior.

"Our lawyers are our greatest asset?" "Our firm's culture provides its distinctive strength?" "You'll have the opportunity of your life to grow and contribute?"

It's time to make these promises real. Let the answer to "Do I Dare Say Something?" be an unequivocal yes.

Posted by Bruce at April 30, 2007 8:05 AM | TrackBack
Posted to Cultural Considerations | Leadership | Partnership Structures | Practice Group Management

Printer-friendly version
Comments
Bruce, this column reminds me of an incident that occurred several years ago. I was the underwriters' counsel on a major IPO with two lead underwriters. A problem came up that was caused by one of the other underwriters that had the potential of delaying our offering and it was extremely embarassing because it was clearly the fault of the underwriters. The reaction of the managing directors of each of the two lead firms was extremely interesting. The reaction of the first was to ask, "Ok. That is unfortunate. How do we fix this and reassure the client that it won't happen again?" The reaction of the second, was to ask (in an unguarded moment) "Ok. How do we make sure that I won't get blamed for this?" Now, one of the managing directors was from a firm that has never had a major merger and has grown through internal promotion and selective lateral hiring. The other managing director was from a firm that was the product of a (then) recent merger of two firms with radically different cultures and backgrounds and where it was rumored that there were internal struggles for dominance by the two groups. Can you guess who was from which firm? Can you see the applicability to law firms? That's the easy question. The harder question, is whether, despite the difficulties of integration and the operating disfunctionality while the Darwinian dominance struggles played themselves out, was the second firm's growth strategy the correct one? Eventually, the second firm has emerged as major player in its markets and with a larger market share than its predecessor firms. I suspect that if the same question came up today, I would not get the question about "blame". The survivors there today are far more focused on the things that count. While I think many law firm leaders would like to see their firms grow without mergers, not every firm has the luxury of a market position that would allow that. Secondly, is faster growth worth the disruption in culture, even if temporary? How long is temporary? 2 years? 5 years? Is the disruption, the changes that cause people not to speak up, worth it in exchange for the greater growth potential?

Posted by: interestedreader at April 30, 2007 2:03 PM

Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):


Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?


Law Firm Finance 101 Seminar

People Are Talking

"Adam Smith, Esq. is, and will remain, the definitive voice on law firm strategy."
David Jabbari, Global Head of Know-How, Allen & Overy

"I just don't know what the profession would do without you."
—Chairman, AmLaw 25 firm

“Constantly stunning.’—Managing Partner

"I read three things:  The Wall Street Journal, The Economist, and Adam Smith, Esq.—and I tell my partners to do the same."
—Managing Partner, AmLaw 50 firm

“You have a fascinating niche which you cover ever so much better than does the conventional legal press.”
—Walter Olson of Overlawyered

“Required reading: Amazing.”—Venture Capitalist

"You're the brand name in law firm economics. There is no one out there—repeat, no one—who covers this business better, or thinks about it more creatively, than you. I tell people this guy is really, really good."
—Chair/Managing Partner, AmLaw 50 firm

Links: law
Links: corporate law
10b-5 Daily
Business Pundit
CorporateCounsel.Net Blog
Conglomerate

links: economics
Atlantic Blog
BusFilm by Larry Ribstein
Business Pundit
Carnival of the Capitalists
Chicago Boyz
Ensight
Marginal Revolution
Ronald Coase Institute
Stephen Bainbridge
Links: tech & culture

"Adam Smith, Esq.,"® an inquiry into the economics of law firms, and the maroon banner, are a federally registered trademark belonging to Adam Smith, Esq., LLC, which is partially owned and controlled by Bruce MacEwen.

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.