Service · Engagement & employee voice
Engagement surveys for law firms
Firm-wide engagement measurement run as a programme rather than an event, so movement is legible between cycles and the readout is the start of the work rather than the end of it.
Who this is for
- Firms running a first engagement survey, or restarting one that stalled
- Chief People Officers who need results the management committee will act on
- Firms measuring the effect of a specific change — hybrid policy, class size, compensation
Most engagement data dies between the readout and a decision
Only a small minority of employees anywhere strongly agree that their employer acts on survey results. Once a firm has run one survey that visibly changed nothing, the next one gets lower participation and blander answers, and the instrument stops working.
The failure is rarely the questionnaire. It is that no one owned a decision afterwards, and that the results arrived without the comparison needed to tell an ordinary score from a genuine problem.
How a cycle runs
SRA designs the instrument, runs the cycle, chases participation, processes the data and delivers the reports. Your team approves the questionnaire and reads the findings.
- Weeks 1–2Item selection against the SRA law firm item bank, plus any firm-specific questions, and firm approval.
- Week 3Population load and distribution by individual secure link.
- Weeks 3–5Fielding, automated reminders and live participation reporting to the firm.
- Week 6Data aggregation and threshold suppression. Free-text comments reviewed for identifiability.
- Weeks 7–8Reporting by office, practice group, tenure and role, with benchmark comparison, then an action-planning session.
What you receive
Firm and segment reporting
Results by office, practice group, tenure band and role, wherever response volumes clear the threshold.
Benchmark comparison
Your results read against the market rather than against last year, so a score has a reference point on the day it is read.
Driver analysis
Which items move engagement for your population, so effort goes where it changes something.
Action-planning session
A working session that ends with named owners and dates, not a slide pack.
Pulse and exit instruments
Shorter follow-up cycles and exit measurement to test whether what you changed worked.
Confidentiality
How the data is held, in practice
The rules below are the reason participation holds and the reason findings are worth acting on. They are enforced by where the data sits, not by policy alone.
Read the confidentiality pledge →Independent custody
Response data never enters your firm's systems in an identifying way. SRA holds and processes it as an independent party, under a data processing agreement in which your firm remains the controller.
Suppression thresholds
Below a minimum number of responses, a cut is reported in aggregate or withheld entirely rather than estimated.
Comments reviewed before release
Free-text responses are reviewed for identifiability, so no one can be recognised by role, matter or phrasing.
Certified handling
ISO 27001 certified. SOC 2 Type I available under NDA. GDPR Article 28 and CCPA aligned, with SRA as processor and your firm as controller.
Why firms use an independent party
Every figure below is recorded in an evidence register with its definition, source and period. Illustrative figures used elsewhere in the design are excluded here by design.
- 35 years serving US law firms
- Years of continuous operation, 1991 to present.
- 100+ elite Am Law firms as clients
- Count of distinct Am Law-ranked firms that have engaged SRA. Cumulative, not concurrent.
- 100,000+ confidential surveys conducted
- Count of individual survey responses collected.
- 1,000,000+ performance reports delivered
- Count of individual performance reports produced and delivered.
- ISO 27001 certified
- Certified information security management system. Certificate number and scope available on request.
On engagement and employee voice
All insights →Why Don't Engagement Survey Results Lead to Change?
Only 8% of employees strongly agree their employer acts on survey results (Gallup). Six reasons law firm engagement data stalls, and how to fix each one.
4 September 2026
How US Law Firms Use Exit Survey Data to Reduce Associate Attrition in 2026
82% of US associates leave within 5 years. Most firms only find out why after the fact. Here’s how American law firms use exit survey data to intervene earlier.
20 August 2026
Engagement Survey vs Satisfaction Survey: What's the Difference?
Engagement survey vs satisfaction survey explained: what each measures, when to use it and why it matters for retention.
22 July 2026
What Questions Should US Law Firms Ask in an Engagement Survey? (2026)
40+ engagement survey questions for US law firms across 7 categories, plus the one most firms forget. 2026 question bank from US-law-firm specialist since 1987
26 June 2026
What Does eNPS Mean for US Law Firms, and Why Do Generic 2026 Benchmarks Mislead Managing Partners?
What eNPS is, why generic 2026 benchmarks don’t work at US law firms, how to run it properly, and what a good attorney eNPS score actually looks like.
15 May 2026
Which Employee Engagement Software Should US Law Firms Actually Use in 2026?
Six employee engagement platforms US law firms are evaluating in 2026, where each falls short, and what to do about lawyer burnout and attrition.
9 May 2026