Personal training tools

There are a number of obstacles to a climate conducive to effective training in the typical professional-service firm – most notably the imperative to maintain billable hours. In their early stages of developing training, law firms focused on compliance, using continuing professional development (CPD) requirements to get people to take training seriously. This has its problems, however, particularly the creation of a compliance attitude to training. This is not really the spirit you want your employees to adopt for their personal development.
Many firms have responded to this by creating large central training courses, tracking career progression from induction to partnership and operating something like a compulsory curriculum that applies to all professional staff. This develops the individual in response to their growing seniority and specialisation over time. Principal features are that professional staff will attend prescribed courses at fixed points in the year – their learning effectively embodied in that core programme. Benefits of the structure are its relative ease of management, scalability and cost control, but a disadvantage is it continues to make learning something done ‘by the centre’ (not owned by the individual) to the centre’s agenda. Scope for adaptation to personal preference or needs is difficult to achieve. Allowing individuals to ‘pick and mix’ their training is awkward.
Many professional-service firms are therefore moving to develop the training agenda, responding to these problems to create a less rigid, more responsive training environment that encourages more choice and individual preferences.

Just-in-time training
The ‘nirvana’ of professionals, just-in-time training is the process of picking up technical know-how moments before it is necessary to apply it in the client transaction. This can be compared with attending a course on the subject a few months before (when it suited the department) and then promptly forgetting all about the subject hours later. Although notoriously difficult to achieve because of the cost and resource implications of providing training virtually one-to-one, it can be facilitated through e-learning and other remote learning packages. The advent of sophisticated intranet-based know-how systems has provided some key opportunities. With training and basic know-how material reduced to easily accessible guides, users are able to absorb essential technical material quickly and at no cost, safe in the knowledge it has been approved by the firm. It is not interactive, however, and users are dependent on well-written, high-quality materials. It is only a start – a beginning to the personalised guide to technical issues sought by the professional as a ‘last minute’ stop-gap solution. And from the firm’s perspective it is about bringing know-how to life and making it genuinely useful and valuable to practitioners.
An example of an effective just-in-time training method at Herbert Smith has been the creation of an intranet page dedicated to a vital and new piece of legislation, the Companies Bill (already the single largest piece of legislation in British Parliamentary history). This page comprises links to underlying documents – both internal and external – that serve as guidance notes to the critical aspects of the legislation, such as its impact on directors’ duties, articles of association and the registration of company charges. It brings together learning on one subject, thus serving as a one-stop-shop that can be quickly and easily updated as the legislation changes and new analyses and opinions are formed. It is obviously a know-how source, but it also acts as a dedicated training resource on a key technical issue – no more than a few clicks away and accessible 24/7 as the need arises.

E-learning
Online learning also offers the advantage of being just-in-time, but its 24/7 characteristics suit other contexts as well. Mobile, remote-working staff can remain in touch with their development programmes through e-learning delivery. It is also highly effective for ensuring a consistent message across geographically-diverse organisations, helping to reach the further-flung outposts of the global professional firm that might otherwise miss the training available. It is training within the control of the user: perhaps the ultimate expression of choice. Its singular advantage over know-how is that it is interactive and can be designed to assess understanding through the completion of online exercises, responding to questions and case studies. Linking e-learning to learning-management systems also enables managers to track user attendance and completion rates – a particular advantage for compliance programmes.
Of course, there is a danger that e-learning is seen as a cure-all salvation, offering instant solutions, with reliance placed upon it as the exclusive antidote to the monolithic and inflexible, centrally-driven training programme. The concept of blended learning – integrating e-learning into face-to-face and other training – reduces this risk and simultaneously introduces users inexperienced in the ways of e-learning to its benefits.
Herbert Smith’s introduction of money laundering training through an online package illustrates some of the benefits of e-learning over traditional face-to-face methods. In common with many other professional-service organisations, it is essential (as well as compulsory) to ensure all lawyers in Herbert Smith recognise money-laundering risks and apply money-laundering procedures. Historically, attendance at lectures on the subject – even if mandatory – has been patchy, but it is vital to show the regulators that everyone attends the training. The online course has not only improved compliance rates substantially (because the training is available to be taken at people’s convenience and is presented in an interesting, interactive format); it also enables much more effective monitoring of individual compliance.

Reflective learning
Most lawyers believe the best learning is that actually acquired on the job. The problem that most trainers have with the concept is that too few on-the-job learning opportunities are seized and treated as such. Instead, they are dismissed as just ‘another job done’. This is because the billable-hours culture drives practitioners on to the next deal; time to reflect is seen as time wasted. Creating a willingness to use experience as the basis of analysis, and encouraging discussion about lessons learnt and how to do things differently is a significant breakthrough.
As part of its work-based learning proposals, the Law Society Regulation Board has put forward suggestions to create elements of just such a reflective-learning environment for trainee solicitors. Some management-development programmes for partners use similar methods to enable practitioners to draw their own guided learning out of difficult or complex situations. One important facilitator is to create mentors who can support those wishing to engage in the process; a lack of skilled mentors being the biggest obstruction to reflective learning in a professional-services environment. The challenge is to convince busy practitioners that this is a more useful application of their time than attendance at courses that are easy to sit through but whose value to them is questionable.
On joining one of three departments, Herbert Smith trainees are required to undertake a research and drafting exercise tailored to that department’s practice. Trainees are given individual feedback on their performance and encouraged to identify for themselves how and where they need to develop further skills and improve.
Mentoring is generally undertaken by senior associates, professional support lawyers, and the ‘of counsel’ lawyers described in detail later in this case study.
It is important to draw a clear distinction between mentoring and coaching. At Herbert Smith, mentoring involves a strong element of pastoral care, providing trainees and junior associates with neutral, confidential advice on work-related issues such as applying for a secondment or changing practice area. Therefore mentoring is not linked to the supervision process.

Coaching
Coaching is a more structured process than reflective learning in that it involves the intervention of an outsider working with the learner to assist in identifying where and how they need to direct their development. It is becoming a more established technique in professional-service firms, particularly for more senior practitioners. As with reflective learning techniques, an advantage is that it is tailored directly to the individual and is personal to their exact needs at a relevant point in time. It also gets closer to the heart of many of the underlying development needs of the individual being coached: a person may sign up for a training course, identifying their need as delegation skills, when in fact they have a broader issue about communicating confidently with others. Coaching will flush this out and help to address it in a way that the training programme may never do. Coaching requires time – and as it involves two people, it is not as immediately flexible as e-learning, for example. However, it is still a more flexible animal than centrally-managed training programmes, attracting learners because its benefits can significantly outweigh the upfront investment in time required. The main disadvantage is that it requires skilled (and therefore expensive) resources and so should be used sparingly.
A coaching programme at Herbert Smith supports senior associates that have been identified as partnership-promotion candidates. This benefits the firm directly by bringing forward candidates who are better prepared for partnership. Coaching as a method is ideally suited to this context because of the differing development needs and expectations candidates will have after seven or more years as associates in a wide range of practice areas. The busy schedule of associates with this level of seniority makes attendance at conventional training quite haphazard. Coaching permits more flexibility and quicker response times.
The strategy is to achieve a balance between internal and external providers by building an in-house team of learning and development experts to deliver coaching at mid-management to senior management level – partners and those aspiring to partnership status – while using external providers to address more specialist areas. The decision to bring some coaching capability in house was driven partly by budget and partly because there have been mixed results with some external providers.
The learning and development team at Herbert Smith is strengthened by people who understand the industry. To that end, it has recruited a lawyer who also has a background in organisational psychology. It is important to recognise that effective coaching requires an element of discretion as the confidential relationship between the coach and the individual enables people to address development needs that they might not want to publicise around the firm. For example, a partner might want to polish presentation or pitching skills without the knowledge of the rest of the practice group.
Coaching is particularly popular among partners, especially at the junior level, who want to work on improving their business-development skills. Building business relationships with clients often involves learning new techniques and behaviours that do not always come naturally to lawyers. The same applies to senior associates.
In order to become partners, they need to show that not only can they bill brilliantly, but they will also generate business for the firm. That requires a different mindset as they can no longer simply wait for the work to come to them, but need to create a structured business plan. That prospect can be extremely challenging, particularly for experienced lawyers who are already experts in their own practice areas.

‘Of counsel’ role bridges a structural divide
In 2006, Herbert Smith introduced a new ‘of counsel’ role as an alternative to partnership. By July 2007, 15 associates had been promoted to this role. Its purpose is to recognise associates with a certain level of experience in the firm who, for a variety of reasons, have not aspired to partnership or have not been promoted. However, they are highly valued by the firm and are making a significant contribution to developing the practice and client relationships. The of counsel role includes an enhanced benefits package and salary and a defined set of objectives which relate their work to practice development, technical work and know-how.
Of counsel carries a distinctive status in the firm’s hierarchy: it falls somewhere between senior associate and partner. The role is perceived by partners and those with of counsel status as something worth aspiring to and an alternative career path. It is therefore a retention vehicle. Of counsel lawyers also qualify for coaching. The firm acknowledges the vital role they play and sets them objectives that help to stretch them a little further, and we help them to achieve those with coaching.

The bigger picture
Underpinning these methods of making training more adaptable and flexible to the individual’s learning needs is the demand for a responsive performance-management process that accurately identifies individual development needs and helps employees become aware of options available to address those needs. Unless there is a commitment to use traditional appraisals to identify where individuals require remedial intervention or general development support, any movement away from the characteristic ‘sheep dip’ approach to training will be based entirely on what individuals think suits them. The firm needs to be satisfied that it is committing its human and financial resources wisely to training, and the only way to do that is to have a robust performance-management process that helps the business see what training each person needs in order to be effective within the firm. Most professional-service firms have well-established appraisal systems in place – but how far do they really focus on development needs, rather than the more typical performance measurement?
The approaches described here are by no means the only way to effect a transformation to a more individual approach to training, but they are among the most important tools to help change the way training and development is both structured and perceived. All of this is consistent with the way new generations of learners expect training to work and how businesses want to extract value from development opportunities. They want results rather than just ticked boxes. Increasingly, the challenge for the training manager is to work at evolving the architecture of the historic professional-service firm training programme and take it to the next phase of development.

Strategic overview
Our training strategy is focused on two key areas. First, we have identified where the firm wants to be: an employer of choice and a great place to work. This is a key strategic objective that involves various elements, and professional development and career development have to be part of the mix. It’s about giving people the tools they need to ensure that they develop in the most effective way – and one that suits the business. Herbert Smith’s training agenda is designed to fit around that objective.
The other key element is technical excellence. Herbert Smith has a great reputation for quality and we are always conscious of the need to maintain it at the highest levels. Our definition of technical excellence reaches beyond developing brilliant black-letter lawyers; our lawyers also need to have good commercial judgement that they can apply in a way that benefits their clients. It’s important to recognise that technical expertise is not just about brilliant interpretation of the law; it’s also about translating the law in difficult situations into real advice that works for clients.
Both these elements relate closely to relationship management. Coaching and mentoring is used to help our lawyers genuinely become trusted business advisors to their clients ie. clients seek their advice not just because they know the law, but because they trust them to provide the best advice about what to do in a particular situation. In this way, coaching and professional development helps lawyers build client relationships that enhance both their own reputation and that of the firm. Becoming a trusted business advisor will boost the firm’s reputation in a competitive market and help it to win and retain the best clients.

Next steps
The next steps are concentrating on coaching, business education and development planning.

Coaching
This is provided through the learning and development function. Very few of our practitioners are trained to coach and we need to address that. We want partners, supervisors and mentors not just to be good at giving feedback, but to turn feedback into a learning experience.

Business education
Educating lawyers about general business management is already part of our overall professional development curriculum. Currently the training elements relate to general business awareness and financial skills – understanding accounts and corporate finance. As the programme has evolved sporadically in response to demand, measures are being taken to identify and address any gaps. Evidence is building up internally that people who are dual qualified – who have a management degree and a law degree – bring something extra to the party. So we are exploring how we can best harness and develop those skills.

Development plans:
Senior associates who are potentially on track for partnership already use development plans and these form the basis of coaching discussions. Although our standard annual appraisal includes an element that looks at people’s development plans, this is not currently managed on a structured basis. In the next few months our objective is to roll out development planning to the rest of the firm.

Richard King is head of legal knowledge at Herbert Smith. He can be contacted at richard.king@herbertsmith.com

This article will be published in Ark Group’s comprehensive Professional Training Strategies for Law Firms report, edited by Joanna Goodman. For more information about the report contact Adam Scrimshire at ascrimshire@ark-group.com.