Law: Taking a 'what's-sauce-for-the-goose' approach: Many law firms are following practice management standards introduced by the Law Society. Fiona Bawdon examines the growing trend of staff appraisal

WHEN the Law Society first mooted its proposed practice management standards, one small provincial firm wrote to say that the suggestion of giving staff regular training and appraisals was a waste of time and money because none of its staff stayed very long anyway.

In a similar vein, another firm said there was no need to trouble too much about selecting the right staff. 'If you get someone and they don't fit, then it's 'cheerio', and you get someone else,' they said.

Opposition came from local law societies, too. One wrote that formalised recruitment procedures were pointless because firms had an innate ability to select the right people. To expect them then to give those staff regular appraisals was 'downright nonsensical', it added.

It is exactly these kinds of attitudes that the Law Society is hoping to challenge with its practice management standards. Gerald Newman, the society's practice support manager, stresses that the standards are far from revolutionary. 'We're not being pioneers - if anything, we're 10 years behind]' he says.

Despite what some firms may think, employees would probably welcome the chance to be formally assessed, Mr Newman says. 'Many staff members have friends who work in big companies. They are used to the idea of appraisal and probably find it strange that they don't have it.'

Whatever the expectations of staff, the practice management standards will remain voluntary for all but those firms seeking a legal aid franchise (The Legal Aid Board has incorporated the standards into its franchising requirements). They are intended to improve quality of service and profitability by superseding the kind of haphazard management approach typified by the solicitors quoted at the beginning of this article.

The standards cover six main areas: management structure, services and forward planning, financial management, office administration, case management and managing people.

Under the last heading, the society wants firms to give their staff job descriptions, to use a systematic approach towards selection and recruitment, to provide induction training for new members, to evaluate and appraise staff and to provide continuing training where necessary. As Gerald Newman suggests, some firms are already well on the way to introducing the kind of staff management practices recommended by the society.

The 16-partner Exeter firm, Anstey Sargent & Probert is committed to introducing appraisals for all fee-earners and staff, as part of its gearing up for accreditation under BS5750, the British Standard guaranteeing quality of systems. The firm's managing partner, Jeremy Robinson, says that effective appraisals will eventually allow the firm to introduce a system of profit-related pay.

'If profits are to be significantly improved - to justify the expenditure on quality - the culture needs to be changed,' he says. Mr Robinson stresses that changes need to be introduced carefully. His firm had already aborted its early system of staff appraisals. 'We told people that it would be confidential to certain partners, but the information leaked, so we brought the shutters down,' Mr Robinson says. Staff appraisals will be reintroduced only once the firm is confident it can run them effectively, and after other quality procedures are in place, he says.

Gotelee & Goldsmith, in Ipswich, is also working cautiously towards staff appraisals. The 12-partner practice - a member of the law firm network LawNet - wants to have its quality systems in place before subjecting staff to a formal process of assessment. 'We felt that appraisal ought to be only one aspect of a much wider review of how we treat our staff,' says the firm's managing partner, Michael Sparrow.

The firm has been working with management consultants to help it develop better communications between staff and partners. 'It was an interesting exercise', Mr Sparrow says. 'There proved to be a great disparity between what the partners thought they were getting right and what the staff thought.'

Mr Sparrow was 'exhorted' to change his own behaviour. 'I used to run 10 minutes late, as a matter of course. I suppose it made me feel busy,' he says.

The consultants discovered that the other fee-earners similarly always ran behind schedule. Most clients, however, were found to arrive 10 minutes early, and as a result had to wait at least 20 minutes before being seen. 'It is a bit difficult to shake off 20 years of being late,' Mr Sparrow says. 'But you have to ask yourself, 'Do I really need to take that last phone call'? '

When the staff appraisal system is finally in place, Mr Sparrow believes it may be extended to include partners. 'Partners appraisal is always a bit of a sticky subject, but I see no reason why we shouldn't do it. It would get my vote,' he says.

One firm that is already running partner appraisals is the Devon-based 16-partner Woollcombe Beer Watts, a member of the network LawGroup. Marjory Mulrooney, the practice manager, says the experience has been relatively painless, adding that the process has already resulted in higher profits.

Everyone at the firm has an annual appraisal to consider his or her general career progression and development. All partners, including the senior partner, and other fee-earners also have monthly appraisals to assess the level of income they have generated.

In a similar spirit of what's-sauce- for-the-goose, Hancocks, a three-partner practice in Oxford, has opened its partnership meetings to all staff. The open approach replaces what Andrew Rigby, a barrister and the firm's chief executive, describes as a 'command and control' management style. The only matters now kept secret from staff concern hiring and firing, and partners' personal financial information.

Following the change in management style, the firm's reception staff have developed their own 'client promises'. These include giving each new client an appointment within 36 hours and answering the telephone within four rings.

Hancocks is now moving on to tackle what Mr Rigby calls ' 'ideas to exceed clients' expectations'. So far these include the free use of a telephone for business clients who are kept waiting and keeping an eye on car parking time.

These ideas, like most moves to improve quality, are just common sense, Mr Rigby says. They are also good business sense. During the first year of Hancocks' quality programme, turnover went up by 20 per cent; in the second year (1992 / 93), it increased by a further 54 per cent.