Legal firms reconsider bonus structures: office attendance takes centre stage
Faith Kelly, Sellick Partnership
In the ever-evolving world of legal practice, law firms must continuously explore ways to boost productivity in line with the expectations of stakeholders.
However, one strategy that has garnered attention over the last few months is tying bonuses to office attendance. Although we are only witnessing this proposal in the larger, international firms, it has left many legal professionals wondering whether this could start to be observed as a general, and common, bonus objective.
To clarify, most of what we are seeing is firms asking employees to be office-based at least three days a week, to be considered for a bonus. While this approach may seem quite straightforward, and one I don’t feel is unreasonable, it raises important questions and considerations for both legal professionals and the firms they work for.
So, are we going to see this ‘target’ implemented as standard within the private practice? And, if we do, how could this impact the industry?
The shift towards office attendance
Traditionally the legal profession has upheld a culture of long hours at the office as a badge of dedication and commitment. However, like many industries, this transformed during the pandemic with remote working becoming not only a possibility but an increasingly popular benefit to many professionals.
However, now that we’re well adjusted to life post-pandemic, some firms are reflecting fondly on a time when their bustling offices were filled with a sense of collaboration and relationship building, all whilst preserving a strong office culture.
For many, the idea of getting back to the office (even for three out of five days) comes with a certain amount of apprehension, especially if the firm has previously championed a flexible policy. For these professionals to then be informed that their hard-earned bonus is only eligible if they adhere to office attendance guidelines can cause unease.
Below, we will explore the pros and cons of this strategy.
Pros to an office-based bonus structure
- Team bonding: In-person interactions and collaboration can strengthen team dynamics, which can positively impact the quality of legal work. This also stops employees from isolating themselves away from physical interactions.
- Training: Being with junior members of staff and offering them the support they need as they begin their careers. Some legal professionals may have been at the newly qualified or junior level before the Covid pandemic, where they might have had the role models to learn from in the office and didn’t have to navigate a world where they had to learn virtually.
- Objective: Some legal firms have bonus targets that are very vague, and management will say it’s discretionary. With office attendance, you have tangible evidence when it comes to a performance review, which eliminates any grey areas.
- Culture: A strong office culture can enhance job satisfaction and retention. It can be argued that a company’s culture comes alive when you’re surrounded by your colleagues. One of the most common questions I’m asked by candidates is ‘what is the culture like?’ My common response is that they will be expected to attend the office three days a week and work flexibly (from home or elsewhere) for the other two days, therefore this is already a very common approach.
Finding a balance like this still allows culture to shine through in terms of social activities after work or on lunch breaks. This offers tangible examples to discuss with candidates, who always seem enthusiastic to learn more. Whereas, if roles are fully remote, culture would only come to light during isolated, one-off occasions such as teambuilding or Christmas events.
Cons to an office-based bonus structure
- Lack of performance measurement: Focusing solely on attendance may neglect the assessment of the quality and impact of an employee’s work. People who still perform really well but want to work from home, don’t want to be penalised for that. This may especially be the case if they're still networking virtually and billing, earning the company a substantial amount.
- Diversity and inclusion: Some employees may face obstacles in meeting office attendance requirements, potentially impacting diversity and inclusion efforts. This could include those with childcare or general caregiving commitments and disabilities.
- Stagnation: Implementing this strategy could drive the wrong behaviours, bringing overall morale down, especially if people are coming to the office and resenting being there.
- Money-saving: Employees may be saving a considerable amount of money by not travelling into the office. This can also save staff a noticeable amount of time that they usually spend on their daily commute.
- Could it change: Staff may worry that the guidance for office attendance may be increased again, until their bonus is reflective of a five-day office-based week.
Finding the balance
To strike a balance between the advantages of office presence, and the flexibility offered by remote work, law firms should consider the following steps:
- Clearly define expectations: Establish clear guidelines for when physical presence is necessary and when remote work is acceptable. For example, how many days in the office, compared to working from home, which days (if any) do you want people in the office? At Sellick Partnership we adopted a 3-2 approach with three days in the office, one of them must be Monday the other two are flexible to benefit the individual or team.
- Performance metrics: Assess employee performance based on objective criteria, not just office attendance. This may include client satisfaction or billable hours.
- Flexibility: Offer flexibility in work arrangements, recognising that different legal roles may have varying requirements.
- Communicate: Maintain a culture of transparency and communication between employer-employees, so that the firm can act in the best interests of all staff, collectively.
- Regular review: Continually evaluate the effectiveness of this approach and be open to adaptation if this is needed to align with evolving workplace trends.
Ultimately, I don’t see an approach that keeps every member of staff happy, unfortunately, it’s an impossible job for leadership. The only thing you can do is be transparent, communicate and ask for individual circumstances.
In my opinion, asking staff to attend the office three days a week is very quickly becoming an industry expectation and one that most candidates are more than happy to adhere to. However, I can acknowledge that this isn’t ideal for absolutely everyone and that some legal professionals might be hesitant about where this leads.
Hopefully, law firms aren't doing this to correct the behaviour of those misusing the flexibility. If that is the case, that needs addressing and tackling before anything else.
Sellick Partnership offer a complete legal recruitment service on a nationwide basis within the private, public and not-for-profit sectors. See the current roles from Sellick Partnership.
In association with Sellick partnership: