Work Ethic MIA?
A column1 in today's Wall Street Journal talks about rising attrition among young associates at law firms. According to author Ashby Jones,More and more associates at law firms across the U.S. are second guessing whether they want to sign over their lives to their jobs. Some are working fewer hours. Some are losing interest in making partner. And they are leaving big law firms in droves.Is the work ethic fading away? Since law firms are still churning out contracts, briefs, estate plans, and everything else they produce, it's hard to conclude that slackers are taking over.
Instead, it makes sense to look at what else is changing and see what adjustments astute firms are making. This is exactly what Ashby does, and, in reading his article, I was struck by the applicability of what he describes to a range of occupations, not just law.
It is certainly true that many contemporary jobs, especially in the service sector, are more labor-intensive than one might imagine when musing about the nature of work in the "knowledge economy." Just as in olden times, excellent performance requires substantial time and effort. Employees who are looking for ways to earn a comfortable living without exerting themselves better hope they win the lottery.
On the other hand, the shift toward a service economy, along with the intensifying competition associated with globalization, are driving companies "built to last" to focus on the finer points of working smart. Brute-force approaches are not viable over the long haul because competitors will win business by achieving greater efficiency.
For individuals, a big part of working smart is getting involved in work you truly care about. (One example Ashby cites is a young couple, both lawyers, who "plan to depart for Europe this month to pursue a business plan they began dreaming up after they realized life at a big law firm wasn't for them.")
For companies, working smart means giving concerted attention to distinguishing between efforts necessary to assure quality, and busy work, i.e., efforts that, in the customer's eyes, simply don't add value.
Another lesson law firms are beginning to learn that has broad application is the importance of rethinking what high-performing employees can be offered in the way of career advancement. For instance, Ashby reports that the ratio of associates to partners at big law firms is rising. If advancing to partner is the only career path offered, there is an obvious incentive for associates to bail out if they doubt that partnership is in their future (either because the odds are against them, or because they don't relish partner roles and responsibilities).
What sorts of alternate career paths are possible? The options depend to an extent on the particular industry, but Ashby's report on what some law firms are doing is again suggestive. For instance, he quotes a second-year associate at one firm who believes expanding associates' responsibilities can help retention. He also cites a law firm whose high associate-satisfaction survey results are in part due to the extensive training the firm provides.
In sum, here's what we find upon taking a closer look at apparent fading of legal associates' work ethic: We're actually dealing with a situation in which performance and retention are enhanced by matching people to responsibilities they care about, encouraging them to work smart as well as hard, and structuring incentives to fit their individual motivational profiles.
__________
1 "Law-Firm Life Doesn't Suit Some Associates," by Ashby Jones, Wall Street Journal, May 2, 2006, p B6.
Labels: Management practices
posted by Karen Nelson @ 10:44 AM
<< Home