Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski
I first joined a small boutique. After 3 months it merged into my first biglaw. The first set of reviews, the IP guys had no idea what the reviews were about. 1 of the 7 partners had a legit beef about the quality of my work. I'd fucked up a project for em. but i got 5 reviews saying I did sloppy work. when i asked, the other 4 pointed to the one guy's complaint. i about got fired. don't know what you mean by "co-ordinate" but I don't trust most of these guys to do that. reviews are about what each reviewer feels about work they've reviewed; not about what they've heard others say.
|
Damn, man, you're darker than just swarthy, aren't you?
I think a key to good reviewing is getting people who haven't worked with someone to shut up and listen. As lawyers, we're really bad at this. But it's critical.
Best I've seen it done was my original firm, which had everyone do written reviews that included a line for how many hours and on which projects the associate had worked for someone. If it was less than 20 hours, someone read it but other than that you weren't part of the full review. If it was more than 20 hours, it got put in the stack with others, a single reader culled through and wrote a summary of where there were themes and outliers, and then the review was given (by two partners). But it all was in writing to avoid the herd mentality.
