How Feedback Shapes Junior Lawyer Performance

When a junior associate made a critical error on a seven-figure case, I had two choices: fire them or mentor them. It reminded me of two mistakes that shaped how I lead my firm today. In one firm, when I made a mistake, a partner tore into me. And I didn't become better - I became unnecessarily afraid. As a result: - my growth stalled. - my confidence collapsed. - my respect for leadership vanished. Later, when I made a mistake, a different partner coached me instead of criticized: As a result, I flourished, gained confidence, and developed a profound respect for the leader who saw my error as an opportunity rather than a failure. This contrast directly shaped our firm's core philosophy: Always assume positive intent. When someone on your team makes a mistake, resist the easy assumptions: - They were careless - They didn't care enough - They're incompetent Instead, lead with curiosity: - "Walk me through your thought process" - "Let's retrace the steps together" - "Help me understand how you reached this conclusion" You'll be shocked how often you discover: - Their reasoning was sound but they missed one key factor - They were working with incomplete information - Their approach was different but still valid - You misunderstood their presentation The strongest legal teams aren't those that make the fewest mistakes. They're the ones that respond to mistakes in ways that build rather than break confidence. You see, great leadership isn't about finding perfect people. It's about creating an environment where imperfect people can do exceptional work.

This firm kept losing Associates at the 3-year mark. They tried higher pay and better perks. Same problem. Then they finally asked people why they'd left. A Managing Partner called me a few months ago. His firm had lost six Associates in two years. All of them are between their third and fourth year. All of them strong performers. He assumed it was compensation. They benchmarked salaries, increased bonuses, added a few extra perks. The exits continued. Eventually, he did something most firms never bother with. He asked me to reach out to the people who'd left and find out what actually happened. The answers were almost identical in every case. It was the transition from year two to year three. In the first two years, they had structure. Supervision. Clear tasks. Regular feedback. They knew exactly what was expected of them. Then suddenly, they were expected to run their own matters, manage junior lawyers, and develop client relationships. With no guidance on how to actually do any of it. "I went from feeling supported to feeling completely abandoned overnight," one of them told me. The firm had invested heavily in training junior Associates. But they'd assumed that by year three, people would just figure it out. Except that the three-year mark is where lawyers shift from technical execution to judgment, leadership, and client management. It's arguably the hardest transition in a legal career. If your mid-levels keep leaving, the problem might not be your competitors offering more money. It might be the gap between what you expect and what you're teaching them. Only, you'll never know that until you ask. #recrevigroup #law

Have you ever wondered how to give associates more effective feedback? Having practiced law for 15 years, I received and gave a lot of feedback. Much of it was ineffective. Here’s why. Attorneys who are delegating work are busy. They often think the most efficient way to give feedback is to tell the associate what they did wrong and how to fix it. But research shows that telling people what they did wrong triggers stress, shame and fear. It raises defenses and lowers confidence. People on the receiving end typically become resistant or compliant. Neither response helps the attorney develop. Harvard Law professors Sheila Heen and Douglas Stone found that even when the person giving feedback is well-intentioned, telling someone what they should do can “spark an emotional reaction, inject tension into the relationship, and bring communication to a halt.” Research shows that using a coaching approach to feedback is most effective. Here are 3 steps senior attorneys can take to give more effective feedback: 1️⃣ Create an atmosphere of trust and acceptance so the associate feels the senior attorney genuinely cares about their professional development. Psychological safety is a prerequisite for the associate’s brain to be open to learning. 2️⃣ Engage in a conversation with open-ended questions, based in non-judgmental curiosity, to explore the associate’s thinking, planning, and execution of the project you’re discussing. Draw out the associate’s own ideas for improvement. 3️⃣ If the associate lacks the experience or knowledge of how to improve, ask, “may I share some tips?” and then share. Asking permission helps the associate feel respected. This further lowers their defenses and opens their brain to learning. If you’ve received or given effective feedback that led to genuine growth, what worked well? Please share in the comments. #AttorneyDevelopment #ProfessionalDevelopment #EffectiveFeedback

Three years ago, she was the brightest student- an incredibly capable one, the kind any law firm would want to hire first. I spoke to her recently and noticed she had slowly started doubting herself. She wasn't lazy. She wasn’t disinterested. She wasn’t “not smart enough.” What had changed was the system around her. No clear feedback- only silence until something went wrong. No real mentorship- just “figure it out, that’s how we learned.” No structure- only unspoken expectations and moving goalposts. Eventually, the narrative shifted. From “she’s learning” to “maybe she doesn’t have it.” That’s when it hit me: When systems break, people blame talent. And that’s almost always the wrong diagnosis. I’ve seen this in law schools, court chambers, law firms, and fast-growing startups. A student is labelled “not cut out for law.” A junior is tagged “slow” or “not proactive enough.” A team is told they just need “better people.” We are quick to question people, but slow to question processes. We find it uncomfortable to ask- - Was there a clear onboarding system? - Was feedback structured or just reactive? - Were expectations articulated or assumed? - Was growth designed, or left to survival? But talent doesn’t disappear overnight. It erodes quietly inside systems that don’t teach, don’t guide, and don’t pause to reflect. Most people don’t fail because they lack intelligence or drive. They struggle because they’re operating inside: - broken mentorship structures - unclear workflows - outdated evaluation metrics - environments that reward output but ignore learning Blaming talent is easy. Redesigning systems requires humility. Because system-failure requires leadership to pause, redesign, and take responsibility. Before you conclude “they’re not good enough,” it's worth asking whether the system ever gave them a fair chance to become good. That question changes everything. Sammanika Rawat Founder, Your Legal Career Coach (YLCC)

There is one statement that tells me when a junior lawyer isn't learning. It’s usually preceded by some feedback that the lawyer doesn’t want to hear. Their response: "I know, I know." This response tells me two things: They don’t actually know, and they aren’t learning. I know this because this response is a reflex—a nervous habit that replaces actual learning. What I look for my junior lawyers to say instead is: "So in this case, we'd never do that because ___?" "How is this different from the project where I did X and you didn't say anything?" "What about this situation—would the same rule apply?" I want dialogue. Questions. Curiosity about the why behind the feedback. The disconnect: Getting into law school is a rigorous experience, and admitting you don’t know the answer isn’t how young lawyers have become successful. Yet, I need young lawyers to ask questions. I want them to be able to admit they don’t know and know when to ask questions. I know they're smart. Many have an engineering degree and a law degree. They feel like they should already know, but here’s the kicker: Being smart doesn't make you experienced. The best young lawyers I've worked with weren't afraid to say: "I don't understand—can you explain that differently?" "Last night I researched that issue you raised. Here's what I found." "How do I get better at spotting that kind of problem?" Those lawyers are the ones I invest in. Those are the ones who become partners. The ones who just want to escape my office as quickly as possible? They're still making the same mistakes five years later. So here’s my question for all the lawyers leading teams out there: How do you create space for junior colleagues to ask questions without feeling like they're admitting incompetence? #LegalMentorship #ProfessionalGrowth #LawyerLife