The pace of change over recent years has meant that the performance required of partners has increased to such a level that it is not too wild an assertion to say that it is likely that to some degree most professional partnerships have under-performing and non-performing partners. In a post recessionary world when performance will matter as never before, how are professional firms going to manage performance if they are to successfully compete?
Pause for just a moment and think about your own firm. Do you have any under-performing or non-performing partners? And if so, do you know the real cost to you of that underperformance, in addition to the direct financial cost?
I recently began a workshop for a group of professional firms by asking the question: 'How many of you do not have an under-performing partner?' No one raised their hands.
Throughout the professions it would seem that many firms have serious issues of partner under-performance and non-performance, and while some may be tackling the problem head-on, many are doing little or nothing to remedy situations that can seriously affect the well-being of everyone in their firms. I would suggest that no profession is immune from the problem.
Do you recognise the non-performers and under-performers? You may well be able instantly to identify them and you probably even attach to them labels, such as 'cruisers' or 'passengers'. Under-performance can often be simply addressed by explaining to the partner concerned what is required of him or her. Lack of communication by management as to what partners should be doing and the levels of performance they are expected to achieve is too often the problem. And if the problem is a lack of skills in a certain area then this can likewise often be remedied. Non-performance, which is often the result of bad behaviour or attitude may be different and may be difficult to change.
But what are you doing about them? The fact that you can recognise those partners who are not pulling their weight means you have already applied certain criteria by which to judge them.
How have you come to the view that a partner is falling short of the level of performance that you demand? Have you ever spoken to that partner to explain that a problem exists, and with a view to at least as a first step trying to help that partner remedy the situation? In many partnerships there is not yet an established culture of performance to set standards by which all partners can be judged, other than those standards set by the worst performers.
The kind of performance I am talking about is that of contributing as a partner in the broadest sense, to whatever required standards your firm has set down.
Being technically good at the job should always be a given but just being a good lawyer / accountant / surveyor etc is unlikely to be good enough. I was asked recently by a partnership how they should go about instilling in their partners these performance norms and my advice to them was that they should begin by putting to their partners the following question: 'How much do you really want to earn?' The responses to that question will sort out the men from the boys and serve as a touchstone of how ‘hungry’ are the partners. The greater the hunger factor the easier it will be for a firm to become a bottom-line driven business because it will flush out the partners who really are just cruising or serving out their time.
A great deal of faith is put in annual appraisals as a way of improving performance. But how many are mere formalities when managements go through the motions? Effective appraisal has to be an ongoing, day-to-day process for it to be of real value. In particular, establishing objective performance criteria and methods of performance measurement are central to building a successful performance culture.
In order for professional partnerships to build performance into their partners' behaviour patterns, each partner should be asked annually to show why he or she should, on the basis of agreed and objective criteria, continue to be a partner in the firm. Only those who are not contributing in the manner required of them will have anything to fear from this. Alas, this is unlikely to happen other than in the most driven firms.
The rest will, unless there is a crisis, continue to accept levels of performance from many partners which on any objective basis should be unacceptable. That crisis is with us now.