Quietly, many law firms are changing how performance reviews work.
Not because annual reviews are unpopular.
But because they no longer match how legal work actually happens.
In 2026, “leading firms” are not defined by size or brand. They are defined by whether their performance systems:
- reflect real client work,
- support earlier course correction,
- and produce decisions people understand and accept.
Here is what those firms are doing differently and why it matters.
The shift underway: From rituals to signals
Traditional law firm performance reviews were designed for a slower world:
- stable staffing,
- predictable workloads,
- and long feedback cycles.
That world no longer exists.
Matters move fast. Teams shift quickly. Associates expect clarity earlier. And leadership needs signals, not summaries, to manage talent risk.
Industry research supports this shift. Gallup consistently finds that employees who receive frequent, meaningful feedback are far more engaged than those who receive feedback only annually.
Source: https://www.gallup.com/workplace/357764/fast-feedback-fuels-performance.aspx
Leading law firms are responding by redesigning reviews around three structural changes.
1. Continuous signals are replacing annual verdicts
Annual reviews still exist in many firms but they are no longer the primary source of performance insight.
Instead, leading firms are layering in continuous performance signals that arrive closer to the work itself.
What this looks like in practice
- Short, matter-based feedback after key engagements
- Mid-cycle check-ins that flag risk early
- Lightweight prompts tied to observable behavior, not personality
The goal is not more feedback.
The goal is earlier feedback, while it can still influence outcomes.
Data from Gallup shows that feedback loses effectiveness rapidly when delayed, especially in high-pressure professional environments.
Source: https://www.gallup.com/workplace/357764/fast-feedback-fuels-performance.aspx
This aligns with what SRA sees across law firms: associates who receive timely, specific input are significantly less likely to describe reviews as “surprising” or “unfair.”
2. Development feedback is being separated from compensation decisions
One of the most important changes in 2026 is also one of the hardest.
Leading firms are decoupling development feedback from compensation outcomes.
Why? Because when feedback directly affects pay:
- honesty drops,
- ratings inflate,
- and written comments become vague.
Research summarized by Harvard Business Review shows that employees are less likely to give or receive candid feedback when it is tied tightly to compensation or promotion decisions.
Law firms experience this problem more acutely because partner evaluations carry real economic consequences.
What leading firms are doing differently
- Creating distinct data streams:
- one for coaching and growth,
- one for formal evaluation.
- Allowing space for honest developmental input that is not weaponized later.
- Using patterns and trends not isolated comments in compensation discussions.
This does not mean accountability disappears.
It means feedback regains credibility.
3. Matter-based feedback is replacing generic evaluations
Another defining feature of redesigned review systems is context.
Leading firms no longer ask associates to be evaluated in the abstract.
Instead, they anchor feedback to:
- specific matters,
- specific teams,
- and specific working relationships.
Why matter-based feedback works better
- Partners remember concrete examples
- Associates understand what to repeat or change
- Firms can compare performance across different contexts
This also reduces partner-to-partner variance, one of the biggest drivers of perceived unfairness in law firm reviews.
The NALP Foundation has repeatedly reported that inconsistency in evaluation and unclear expectations are major contributors to associate dissatisfaction and attrition.
Source: https://www.nalpfoundation.org
Matter-based feedback gives firms a way to normalize evaluation without forcing partners into rigid scoring systems.
What redesigned reviews achieve in 2026
Firms that have made these shifts report clearer outcomes:
- Fewer “surprise” reviews
- Earlier detection of burnout and disengagement
- More productive calibration conversations
- Higher trust in leadership decisions
Importantly, they are not relying on intuition alone.
They are using better-designed performance systems to support judgment.
This matters as technology continues to accelerate expectations across the profession. Legal tech leaders including Litera predict that AI-driven tools will raise the bar for speed and clarity across law firm operations, including people management.
Source: https://www.litera.com/blog/ai-legal-tech-5-predictions-2026
A practical checkpoint for firm leaders
Ask yourself:
- Do associates receive feedback while work is still fresh?
- Is developmental input safe to give honestly?
- Can performance be explained with evidence not anecdotes?
- Does your system reflect how matters actually run?
If the answer is “not consistently,” your review process may be designed for the past not 2026.
A note from SRA
At Survey Research Associates, we help law firms redesign performance reviews so they produce clearer decisions, earlier insight, and greater trust without adding administrative burden.
If your firm is rethinking performance reviews for 2026, you can learn more about our approach here:
No pitch. Just perspective.
.png){kind=small}