Originally published on May 18, 2009 in our free BigLaw newsletter.
We can all think of trends and innovations that initially seem like the Next Big Thing only to fizzle or quickly become outdated. A few come to mind, such Betamax, AOL … and law firm mentoring programs.
While mentoring programs may not have been widespread years ago, today they are ubiquitous. But are they a true innovation or more like fad diets? If Oprah can't stay on track, who can?
Like those diets, mentoring programs are well-intentioned and carefully planned, but ultimately difficult — and perhaps too difficult — to fit to the needs of all involved. As a mid-level associate, "Christina" experienced just such a program.
My Boss, My Mentor?
Christina worked exclusively for "Ted," a very intense and very busy partner who had something of a niche practice at their mid-sized Connecticut firm. Though Ted had an impressive book of business and an enviable roster of clients, he was not, Christina says diplomatically, particularly "nurturing." He often threw her head-first into assignments with minimal explanation and even less ongoing supervision. And because he traveled frequently, and struggled to meet the needs of his many clients, Ted was often unavailable to field questions or provide guidance.
When Christina's firm announced a comprehensive new mentoring program, she was delighted. "I thought it would be an opportunity to really connect with a more experienced lawyer at the firm," she recalls. "I loved the idea of having a professional role model, who I could turn to when I had questions about judgment calls in certain situations, or needed help with substantive skills, like writing." In addition, she says, "I felt that Ted was often critical of my work, but didn't offer much feedback. I thought that if I could talk openly to a more experienced attorney and maybe get some constructive criticism, I might be able to actually improve, instead of just feeling chastised."
When the mentor-mentee pairings were announced, however, Christina's hopes sank: they paired her with Ted. "Ted barely had the time or inclination to deal with me when cases required him to," she explains. "It seemed unlikely that he would put any effort into an 'extracurricular' effort to help me develop professionally."
Unfortunately, Christina's hunch was correct. Months went by, and Ted made no effort to fulfill his "duties" as a mentor. Christina tried gently to remind him that she was available for a mentor-mentee lunch or meeting. Nothing happened. Finally, after some less gentle nudging by the firm's Mentoring Program Committee, Ted took her out for an awkward lunch, where they ended up discussing a rolling document production. "The level of mentoring," she says, "was basically imperceptible."
In short, says Christina, she did not feel that she benefited from the mentoring program. "I thought that the firm was wrong to pair me with Ted," she says. "First of all, we didn't have a great relationship to begin with. But I also worked for him, so it didn't make sense for him to be designated as the person I would go to when I was having problems with the person I worked for … or even just with general issues, like my workload or skills. Rather than feeling like he would listen and try to advise me, I worried that he would write me a bad performance review — based on my own admissions about areas in which I thought I was lacking."
But was the failure of this mentoring relationship as simple as bad matchmaking? Christina thinks it was more complicated. Another critical problem, she explains, was that Ted was not interested in being a mentor. Although the firm pushed him to be more involved, and even provided him with ideas and suggestions for how to be a better mentor, he did not have the time — or the skills — to function in that role.
Mentoring Done Right
Sadly, Christina's experience is not unique. Where, then, does that leave the well-intentioned law firm? Is the effort of trying to design — and implement — a successful mentoring program an exercise in futility? "Jeff," a partner at a large firm in the New York area, thinks not.
Admittedly, he says, mentoring programs present significant challenges, and require a great deal of effort. Part of the difficulty, he says, is illustrated by a story like Christina's: mentoring involves an organic relationship, and relationships are as difficult to initiate and grow in the professional environment as they are anywhere else.
Jeff uses a litigation analogy to explain. "You prepare for trial, but the case settles. In other words, a good lawyer doesn't litigate to settle; he or she litigates to win. For that reason, you always conduct yourself as though you will try the case … but if settlement happens along the way, so be it. Similarly," he continues, "mentoring happens. You can't necessarily force people together into a mentoring relationship and expect that it will always work, irrespective of your best intentions and all the planning you do, like looking into people's backgrounds for shared interests, common experiences, and that sort of thing."
Notwithstanding the significant challenges, says Jeff, "they don't mean you can't have a formal, organized mentoring program that works." But, Jeff warns, if you want your mentoring program to succeed, you should be prepared to put in a lot of effort — and to keep it coming.
"Our experience," he explains, "is that a good mentoring program requires almost constant vigilance. Someone needs to follow up, fairly regularly, with the people on both sides of each mentoring relationship to find out if it's working." He concedes that "this is an imperfect system, because not everyone trusts that their response to such inquiries will be kept in confidence, but, with time, hopefully people can learn that they can speak freely about their feelings."
Success also requires flexibility, says Jeff, and the willingness to find creative ways to respond to the many, and variable, needs of individuals. Although it can be incredibly difficult, he says, "you need to be capable of implementing changes, even when some people may suffer from hurt feelings. It doesn't make any sense to continue to force a broken mentoring relationship on two people, even if only one of them is aware that it's broken."
Back to the Future
It may be attorneys like Jeff (who believe in the tradition — and value — of mentoring) who keep the legal profession true to its roots. Historically, the profession relied on a system of apprenticeship to train its young inductees, and younger lawyers were expected to watch and learn from their elders. Working relationships could be structured to facilitate this kind of close supervision.
Law firm practice today — and big firm practice in particular — is not generally conducive to patient instruction (by the partner) and dedicated learning (by the associate), neither of which translate into billable hours. For these reasons, both formal and informal mentoring fills a significant void in the professional development of new lawyers.
"When it is done properly," Jeff posits, "mentoring can really work well." He believes that both younger attorneys and those who are more senior "can always benefit greatly from the experiences of their more seasoned colleagues. And the benefit can occur in a variety of areas, ranging from substantive legal work to more personal issues (like career decisions) to firm political issues."
Jeff concludes that, overall, mentoring programs may be a challenge to administer, but "they are both good and necessary." After all, today's mentees are tomorrow's partners.
Photo by Tomas N. Romero. All rights reserved.
How to Receive BigLaw
Many large firms have good reputations for their work and bad reputations as places to work. Why? Published first via email newsletter and later here on our blog, BigLaw goes deep undercover inside some of the country's biggest law firms. But we don't just dish up the dirt. We also mine it for best and worst practices and other nuggets of knowledge. The BigLaw newsletter is free so don't miss the next issue. Please subscribe now.
