Biglaw, Small Law Firms

More Law Firms Should Conduct Exit Interviews

Even though no one likes to be criticized, exit interviews can be an invaluable resource, and more law firms should adopt this practice.

By  
on

Anyone who is a fan of “The Office,” or who has been involved in corporate America for some time, should have a solid understanding of what an exit interview is. Essentially, an exit interview is a conversation between an employer and an outgoing employee about a number of topics, including ways that an employer can improve itself moving forward. Perhaps the main reason why exit interviews are helpful is because outgoing employees are far more likely to be forthcoming with frank feedback than people who still work at a shop and who might be fearful of repercussions. However, in my experience, many law firms do not conduct traditional exit interviews. Even though no one likes to be criticized, exit interviews can be an invaluable resource, and more law firms should adopt this practice.

Before starting my own law firm several years ago, I worked at a series of bigger and smaller law firms. None of them conducted a thorough exit interview for me or any of the other associates who left the shop for other opportunities. The first time I left a firm, I was laid off in a massive reduction in force. I do not blame that firm for not asking for feedback since the brass needed to terminate dozens of people the day I was laid off, and they could not possibly take the time to solicit feedback from each and every person they let go.

The second time I left a firm to work at a different shop, the firm never asked to conduct an exit interview of me. I am not sure why the firm did not complete exit interviews of me and other associates who left the firm. The firm was generally welcome to suggestions and had an open-door policy with associates and staff. I think the brass at that shop just didn’t want to be criticized by the exit interview process, which I can empathize with. Nevertheless, that firm should have conducted more exit interviews. I learned that, after I left that firm, some of the partners asked associates who remained why there was so much turnover at the firm. If the shop had conducted exit interviews earlier, partners could have discovered and addressed issues at the firm sooner before they led to people departing.

Another firm I worked at before starting my own practice had perhaps the worst approach to exit interviews. That firm had the office manager conduct the exit interview, likely so they could check some box in their minds that they conducted exit interviews of the outgoing associates. However, it was pretty clear that nothing discussed at the exit interview would impact operations of the firm. The office manager read the broadest questions possible from a list along the lines of “were you satisfied with your rate of pay” and “when did you decide to leave” and nothing of substance was really discussed at the interview.

Exit interviews should be conducted with actual decision-makers at a firm and should not be rigid conversations. Rather, they should be fluid discussions of ways a firm can improve itself. I tried having such a conversation at one of my employers at which genuine exit interviews were not held, but management did not seem willing to have such discussions. Shortly before I left the firm, a partner came by my office to wish me well on my future pursuits, and I suggested that we set up a time to do an exit interview. The partner suggested that we just speak about matters related to the firm then, and I quickly went into some things I thought the firm could improve upon.

I could sense that the partner was not too thrilled about receiving constructive criticism about operations of the firm, and he launched into defending the way things were handled at the firm instead of accepting suggestions about how the firm could improve. The partner definitely looked like he did not want to spend more than a few minutes discussing things, which I get if he was in a hurry, but we could have scheduled a longer time to talk. Some of the things I suggested involved promoting remote work and lowering our real estate footprint well before the COVID-19 pandemic forced firms to think about these issues seriously. In any event, the firm would have benefited from a constructive talk about how the shop could have improved.

All told, law firms have regular evaluations and reviews so that they can keep track of associates and suggest methods of improvement. It is therefore unusual that many law firms do not have built-in processes for soliciting feedback and constructive criticism. Regular exit interviews are an amazing way to receive less filtered and more frank suggestions about a firm since outgoing employees are far more likely to be honest with management. Although it is sometimes uncomfortable to receive criticism, managers provide feedback to associates all the time, and those managers should be more open to receiving constructive criticism during exit interviews with outgoing employees.

Sponsored

Jordan Rothman is a partner of The Rothman Law Firm, a full-service New York and New Jersey law firm. He is also the founder of Student Debt Diaries, a website discussing how he paid off his student loans. You can reach Jordan through email at jordan@rothmanlawyer.com.

Sponsored

Topics

, ,