Rules of engagement: developing an effective learning programme

Earlier this year I joined Russell-Cooke as head of training and development. One of my early projects was to review the provision of non-technical 'soft skills' and personal development training for newly qualified solicitors up to senior associate level and beyond. The outcome was to develop the firm's first structured firm-wide programme to be delivered by internal and external trainers.

Identifying needs

As a qualified solicitor, I have a sound understanding of learning and development (L&D) in the context of a challenging fee-earning environment. However, as any new joiner will know, it was vital for me to gain credibility quickly and the fee earners' confidence in my recommendations for the programme. So what was the best method of consulting with stakeholders and demonstrating commercial and practical insight to ensure that the programme was 'fit for purpose', cost-effective and aligned with the new strategic focus of the firm?

I was keen to be visible as quickly as possible within the business, to discuss views on the existing provision of skills training, identify further learning, training and development '¨needs and review some initial ideas. I organised three 'lunch & learn' sessions for the various '¨levels of PQE: one for NQs and junior associates, one for mid-level lawyers and the third for '¨senior associates.

In advance of each session, I asked each lawyer in the relevant peer group to complete a short learning needs questionnaire via SurveyMonkey, even if they were unable to attend the session. These followed a similar format - the aim being to identify specific areas of learning need (knowledge, skills and behaviours) for current and future solicitors at each of the three levels.

The analysis focused on both job-level and individual-level needs, each questionnaire providing a guide as to relevant skills and training for each peer group. Given the level of training undertaken during their careers, it was assumed that solicitors are relatively experienced learners who can reflect on and analyse their own skills and behaviours. Their input into the process was therefore essential and highly valued.

The response to the questionnaire at each level and the results were used to inform discussions during the sessions.

Informal learning

The 90-minute sessions provided an excellent opportunity to drill down into some of the questionnaire responses and identify priorities for skills topics at each level which would form the basis of my proposed programme of workshops. Each peer group appeared to be very engaged in the process and emphasised the need for a structured firm-wide programme.

I also used 45 minutes of each session as an opportunity for attendees to share ideas or tips on a relevant skills topic. Time management was the theme for the junior and mid-level associates; effective delegation the focus for the senior associate group. In advance, attendees were asked to come to the session prepared to share a tip for others on how they delegate work effectively or to share ideas around effective time management.

This aspect of each session was well-received, serving two purposes: it provided ideas and content for future workshops and allowed me to pilot a more informal style of learning which I believed could work well.

Everyone who attended a session was asked to complete an evaluation questionnaire, again via SurveyMonkey. Feedback was very positive: almost 100 per cent of attendees felt that the session achieved its objectives and 100 per cent recommended that further informal learning sessions be used.

Many comments reflected the benefits of holding sessions involving fee earners across different departments (e.g. for internal referrals purposes and identifying particular expertise). Comments also suggested that the informal and interactive style of learning was effective, e.g. in terms of creating a "relaxed environment" where everyone feels able to contribute and having opportunities to "meet and share ideas with peers".

Recommendations, roll-out and review

The learning needs questionnaire also focused on preferred learning methods and workshop duration. The programme outline of 18 workshops which I presented to the firm's board for approval reflected that a large majority of associates favoured shorter sessions (2 hours to half a day) over a period of time rather than full-day workshops.

The programme also responded to a call for more interactive training, incorporating role play or other practical exercises, where appropriate, depending on the nature of the skill(s) covered. It was felt that both internal and external presenters could achieve this interactive style, however, given the success of the informal learning approach, I was keen to implement as much as possible internally, either myself, or using other willing presenters. I met with a small group of external presenters; some had worked previously with the firm, others had been identified by me to offer expertise in a particular area (and all would fit well with the interactive approach). A balance of internal and external presenters also makes the programme as cost-efficient as possible, despite the indirect costs of internal speakers planning and delivering sessions.

The board agreed with my recommendations and we have recently launched the programme internally, via intranet announcements and individual brochures for associates (containing workshop outlines and acting as an attendance record). The programme reflects the core skills and competencies required by associates to exceed client expectations: in particular, client service, business development, leadership and financial management skills.

Feedback on the first few workshops - 'Building and maintaining client relationships', 'Networking skills - finding and developing clients' and 'Managing your transition - from trainee to solicitor' - has been very positive. The sessions scored highly in terms of appropriate content, meeting learning objectives and delivery/facilitation skills. Associates appeared committed to applying the learning as soon as possible and noted a number of personal action points. There have been some useful practical suggestions regarding future workshops, which will generally run at least once per month.

We will continue to evaluate each session following delivery using SurveyMonkey questionnaires. I will also follow up with two informal focus-group sessions with attendees, one six months into the programme, another at the end of the first 12 months. These should provide further opportunities to measure the relevance and effectiveness of each session and consult in terms of future revisions. I will also revisit the action lists we encourage associates to keep in their brochures and discuss how they have used the learning in their daily roles to improve individual or team performance (financial or otherwise) or client satisfaction. These should also be discussed during the appraisal process. Therefore, engagement with the programme will be continuous, not simply attendance at the relevant workshop. Ultimately, although this is harder to measure, I hope that the increased development opportunities will in part encourage young lawyers to remain at the firm, therefore improving team development, structures and succession and saving recruitment costs. The programme should support all elements of the firm's new strategy.

I also believe that our approach sits well with the SRA's proposals to change the training system, particularly in respect of CPD. I have always struggled with the current tick-box approach to CPD and questioned why some lawyers (and their firms) have not tailored learning and development more effectively to respond to individual and organisational needs. Our approach at Russell-Cooke should stand us in good stead to ask our solicitors to continue to reflect on their learning needs and engage with the L&D team to design solutions which address those needs. Continued consultation and engagement will then have a much broader purpose.