You are here:
  1. Home
  2. News
  3. Blog
  4. Give to receive: how to assign legal work

Give to receive: how to assign legal work

11 July 2017

If lawyers assign legal work and the results don’t meet their expectations, they often blame the people they assigned it to. But, says Gary Richards, the issue often lies with how the work was assigned: the initial conversation and the process following it.


Do you ever have problems getting work done right the first time, when you assign it to others? If so, don't jump to the conclusion that the person is incompetent, or that you don't have enough staff – and don't immediately punish the person you assigned it to by excluding them from future assignments. Instead, examine the way in which you assigned the work. I often find that the problem is more down to how the work was assigned – especially the initial assignment conversation – than to the incompetence or poor attitude of the one doing the work.

Here is how to have an effective initial assignment conversation, how to keep the assignment on track, and how to ensure the work gets done right the first time, on time, and within budget.

How to assign any work

There are two pieces of advice I would give for assigning any piece of work to anyone.

First, take time up front when making the assignment. As they say, 'an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure'. You may feel that you don't have time to invest up front, but that is better than spending time handling surprises or mistakes at the last minute.

Second, assign work by phone or face-to-face if at all possible instead of making the assignment by email. Real-time interaction improves results. Sending an email to someone is not the same as receiving an informed commitment from them.

How to assign work to improve results

If you are assigning work either to someone who has a track record of 'not getting it', or the task is complicated and/or it is the first such task for the person being assigned, the following tips will also help.

1. Establish a clear understanding of expected results

Establish a clear picture of the specific results expected, including in what format (bulleted list, memo, brief draft, Word document, table, Excel spreadsheet, list of issues with answers etc). Agree on the number of hours you and the doer think the task should require (if you don't, the eager beaver might over-work it and the slacker might under-work it). And agree on any special steps or procedures to be used.

2. As much as possible, leave the method to the doer

Have the doer explain how they expect to proceed. If they 'create' the method / steps themselves, they will own them, and be more motivated than if they were working just to please your way.

Once you have listened to how they would proceed, you can then agree, or coach them if you prefer different steps or a different approach.

3. Set deadlines by collaboration

Without a deadline for completion, the task is not fully defined.

Say: 'I'd like this completed by [date and time]. Will that work for you?'Explain why you want it by then. Then discuss / negotiate if needed. Deadlines are more likely to be met when set by collaborating instead of by commanding.

You also need to agree on the other stages of the timeline: when you will review it and when it is to go to the client or court etc.

Acknowledge completion when they finish the work, and review it when you said you would.

4. Schedule progress checks

These should be scheduled at the same time as the timeframe agreed in step 3.

When you tell the doer you will be building progress checks into the schedule, explain the reasons for and benefits of the progress check: to be sure the doer has what they need, and to answer any questions they may have. The role of the progress checks is to reinforce, not enforce.

Scheduling a progress check in advance lets the doer know what to expect. Such advance notice avoids the surprise of a 'drop-in' follow-up, which can appear to indicate a lack of trust and/or be an attempt to 'push' the doer. A progress check also gives incentive to start work immediately in order to be ready with something to report, questions to ask etc. Without a progress check, work might begin too close to the deadline.

Have the doer, instead of you, initiate the progress check when it is due. That way, they 'own' the follow-up, and feel more trusted.

5. Invite them to negotiate their priorities with you

The doer may feel over-committed to other matters / lawyers. Respect their right to show you the impact on their other work commitments if they accept your assignment. Otherwise, they will feel stressed, and you won't know what they might have to give up in order to do what you are asking.

6. Insist that they notify you immediately if your deadline becomes jeopardised

Most people are reluctant to 'raise the flag' when spotting a possible delay. Instead, they prefer to get it back on track themselves so as not to look like they 'couldn't handle it'.

Notifying you immediately instead allows you to help them work out the best recovery plan sooner, and maybe even command some resources not available to the doer.

7. Arrange authority

If you expect an associate or junior partner to request something from other senior partners or clients, inform those senior partners and clients in advance that the doer is representing you, explain why they are being asked, and encourage their cooperation.

This 'credentialises' the doer to others and removes roadblocks.

8. Remain available to help if needed

Each of their requests for help is a coachable moment: to fix their problem, point out what they can do on their own next time, all while assuring them that you care about their success and will pitch in, etc. After all, you have as much interest in their successful work as they do.

Educate them as to where else, besides you, they can go for help within and outside the firm. They keep ownership of the solution, you gain time.

9. Teach: final review

You must review work to ensure quality and value, especially if the doer is a new associate or paralegal.

The final review is also an ideal time for timely coaching or correcting when changes are needed. This is your investment in professional development of the doer.

Have the doer make the corrections – don't do it yourself. That way they learn, and you save time.

Could you be demotivating others?

A motivated person is more likely to perform well on your assignments. It is usually eye-opening to get feedback from those you assign work to about how they feel about it. If you're feeling brave, ask people to whom you assign tasks this question: 'Is there anything I do that frustrates your ability to perform as effectively as you would like?'

The answers could be a real mine of information about how to better assign work in future. Here are some real-life examples I've heard from paralegals and associates over the years.

  • 'You give me the assignment, and then disappear so that no questions that arise can be answered.'
  • 'No deadline is given as to when the work is to be finished. This usually results in your repeatedly checking up with "How are you coming on with X?" I work better with a deadline for completion, and fewer interruptions for status reports.'
  • You set unrealistic expectations as to how much chargeable time the assignment should take, like 'this should take only a couple of hours', but it really takes 10 under the best of circumstances.'
  • 'Too short a lead time was given from assignment date to due date, but only because it was "sat on" for several days, when it could have been handed off to me earlier.'

 Conclusion

By putting some of these tips to work, your conversations assigning tasks to others can be radically improved, hugely impacting whether the work gets done right the first time, on time, and within budget. Your time will be freed and the stress of last minute rework will be avoided, and the motivation of the people you assign to will remain high. Good luck!

This article was originally published in the magazine for our Law Management Section, our community for partners, leaders and practice managers in legal businesses. 

The 2017 Law Management Section programme focuses on practice management, talent management, financial management, staffing models, IT, client focus and information security. 

About the author

Gary Richards is a law firm consultant in the US, a certified legal project manager, and CLE instructor in practice management topics. He is also author of Time Management Handbook for Lawyers (2013).

  • Share this page:
Authors

Adam Johnson | Adele Edwin-Lamerton | Alex Barr | Alex Heshmaty | Alexandra Cardenas | Amy Heading | Andrew Kidd | Andy Harris | Anna Drozd | Annaliese Fiehn | Anne Waldron | Asif Afridi and Roseanne Russell | Bansi Desai | Barbara Whitehorne | Barry Wilkinson | Ben Hollom | Bob Nightingale | Caroline Roddis | Caroline Sorbier | Catherine Dixon | Ciaran Fenton | David Gilroy | David Yeoward | Douglas McPherson | Dr Sylvie Delacroix | Duncan Wood | Elizabeth Rimmer | Emily Miller | Emma Maule | Gary Richards | Gary Rycroft | Graham Murphy | Hayley Stewart | Ignasi Guardans | Jayne Willetts | Jeremy Miles | Jerry Garvey | Jessie Barwick | Jonathan Smithers | Julian Hall | Julie Ashdown | Julie Nicholds | Karen Jackson | Kate Adam | Kayleigh Leonie | Keiley Ann Broadhead | Kerrie Fuller | Kevin Poulter | Larry Cattle | Laura Devine | Leah Glover and Julie Ashdown | LHS Solicitors | Mark Carver | Mark Leiser | Markus Coleman | Martin Barnes | Matthew Still | Meena Toor | Melissa Hardee | Nick Denys | Nick Podd | Pearl Moses | Peter Wright | Philippa Southwell | Preetha Gopalan | Rachel Brushfield | Ranjit Uppal | Richard Coulthard | Richard Heinrich | Richard Messingham | Richard Miller | Richard Roberts | Rita Oscar | Rob Cope | Robert Bourns | Robin Charrot | Rosy Rourke | Sara Chandler | Sarah Austin | Sarah Crowe | Sarah Henchoz | Sarah Smith | Shereen Semnani | Sophia Adams Bhatti | Steve Deutsch | Stuart Poole-Robb | Susan Kench | Suzanne Gallagher | Tom Ellen | Tony Roe Solicitors | Vanessa Friend

Tags

access to justice | anti-money laundering | apprenticeships | archive | artificial intelligence | Autumn Statement | bid process | brand | Brexit | British Bill of Rights | Budget | business | careers | centenary | charity | city | communication | Conservatives | conveyancing | court closures | court fees | courts | CPD | criminal legal aid | cyber security | David Cameron | development | Diversity Access Scheme | diversity and inclusion | education and training | elderly people | emotional resilience | employment law | equality | European Union | Excellence Awards | finance | George Osborne | human rights | human trafficking | immigration | in-house | International Womens Day | Investigatory Powers Bill | IT | Jeremy Corbyn | justice | knowledge management | Labour | law management | Law Society | leadership | legal aid | legal professional privilege | LGBT | Liberal Democrats | library | Liz Truss | Magna Carta | mass data retention | mediation | members | mention | mentoring | merger | modern slavery | morale | National Pro Bono Week | Parliament | party conferences | personal injury | Pii | politics | president | pro bono | productivity | professional indemnity insurance | represent | retweet | risk | rule of law | security | social media | social mobility | SRA | staff | strategy | stress | talent | tax | tax credits | team | technology | Theresa May | Time capture | training | Twitter | UKIP | value proposition | website | wellbeing | Westminster weekly update | wills