Getting communication structures right within your law firm

Communication in professional services firms (PSFs) can be sporadic, badly organised and ineffectively delivered. Communications strategies need to be carefully planned and executed in line with the firm’s strategic objectives. Methods of delivery will of course vary but need to distinguish between the four different types of communication typically found.

1. Firm messages

Informative or educational communications may be self evident, but there are nevertheless three important benefits of getting the process right.

First, the enhancement of the information flow aids decision making at every level so that lines of accountability become clearer and fewer decisions become second guessed. For example, part of the exercise of creating role descriptions for lawyers is to make expectations clear and empower individuals to attain an agreed level of self-sufficiency and decision-making authority in their day-to-day work.

Second, speedy information enables the firm’s professional and support staff to understand the bottom-line effect and strategic implications both of their daily work and the firm’s management decisions. For example, communications aimed at helping the firm improve its working capital by speeding up cash collections need to be consistent, repetitive and well targeted.

Third, good communication of the firm’s strategic objectives makes it possible for every member of the firm to understand and measure the key drivers of the firm’s success. If, for example, it is important for the firm to improve its revenues by gaining more clients, then key communication messages can encourage individual and team participation in focused business development and promotional activities.

2. Ecological initiatives

Every firm has its own ecology or working environment. It is sometimes suggested that leaders cannot manage culture but that culture is more likely to manage them. However, an open and honest communication methodology helps to establish the integrity of the firm’s leadership and their ‘covenant’ with
their people.

At least some of the firm’s communications should be aimed at sustaining the firm’s values and promoting a better place to work. Equally, they should aim to reduce levels of paranoia and tension that can often be found when communications appear to lack honesty or transparency or simply do not happen.
A better-organised communication
process can help to break down the barriers between offices and departments by promoting a one-firm purpose which helps to get people to work better together.

3. Persuasive approaches

Many communication methods seek to persuade or influence changes in attitudes, amplify positive behaviours or persuade weaker individuals to take action in line
with firm disciplines or processes – for example, to improve time recording or
make better efforts to manage their
financial administration.

Old-style office manuals may have given way in many cases to the firm’s intranet but, while such manuals help to set the firm’s work parameters and to explain the firm’s disciplines, they do little to persuade people to move. The point here is that people are best managed one at a time, so a written communication from the firm’s leaders will generally have little effect. Group meetings can allow individuals to keep their heads down and ignore the message. However, group meetings can be useful to build enthusiasm, develop shared attitudes
or influence and encourage peer
group behaviour.

4. Coercive communications

If persuasive communications are aimed to ‘sell’ a message to the audience, then coercive communications seek instead to ‘tell’. Coercion can be explicit or implicit. Coercive communications are most often used where speed is essential and the firm’s leaders hold considerable power to enforce compliance and overcome resistance. These are ‘shape up or ship
out’ tactics.

Culture of secrecy

One of the most frequent complaints heard within PSFs is that the firm’s leaders communicate poorly or ineffectively. Sometimes this appears to be a cultural issue. One partner recently complained
of a culture of secrecy within his firm.
He told me that “many of the minutes just say ‘as discussed’; furthermore, I often don’t know when executive meetings are going to take place and what the agenda is”. In another firm, a partner told me that the managing partner was so unresponsive to emails that partners had stopped communicating with him.

It is often rightly said that culture trumps systems every time, but it seems clear that many firms should spend more time putting in place processes and designing better communications and two-way information flows. The overall objective must be to engage and motivate the firm’s people to deliver the firm’s strategy, not to just try to engender a happier atmosphere or a nicer place to work.

Nick Jarrett-Kerr advises law firms worldwide on strategy, governance
and leadership development
(www.jarrett-kerr.com)