Performance reviews have the potential to shape careers, build leadership pipelines, and strengthen the culture of a law firm.

But too often, outdated beliefs still drive how firms think about them — and that’s where the damage begins.

Normally, firms see performance reviews as a compliance step.

Besides wasting valuable opportunities for development, this mindset causes frustration among associates, misalignment between leaders and teams, and a silent weakening of loyalty and trust.

Because the legal industry is increasingly competitive — not just for clients but for talent — how a firm manages performance reviews today has a direct impact on who chooses to stay, who chooses to grow, and who quietly leaves.

Let’s break down six of the most common myths about performance reviews still seen in law firms — and what the reality looks like when firms evolve.

1. “If we just do reviews annually, that’s enough.”

Normally, annual reviews are treated as the main — and sometimes only — touchpoint for feedback.

Because associates work year-round, they encounter challenges, deliver wins, and need course corrections throughout the year, waiting 12 months to address these moments does little good.

Besides leaving issues unresolved, infrequent feedback creates gaps where associates wonder where they stand.

They begin second-guessing their work, making preventable mistakes, or disengaging quietly.

Firms that integrate quarterly check-ins, project-based feedback, or even informal monthly conversations foster faster improvement, build stronger skills, and avoid unpleasant surprises at year-end.

Consistent feedback creates confident associates.

Confident associates stay longer, bill stronger, and grow into future leaders.

2. “Only partners need formal evaluations.”

Besides the traditional focus on associates, some firms overlook the need to formally evaluate partners and senior leaders.

Normally, the thinking is, "They've already proven themselves — why bother?"

But partner behavior directly shapes associate experience.

Because associates mirror what they see, leadership habits — good and bad — get amplified across teams.

Firms that include partners in upward feedback processes send a clear signal: leadership is not a fixed title; it’s a continuous responsibility.

Evaluating partner performance builds transparency, promotes accountability, and reinforces the idea that everyone, at every level, is expected to grow.

Besides strengthening leadership pipelines, this approach increases trust between associates and senior lawyers — a key factor in long-term retention.

3. “Negative feedback should be avoided to keep morale high.”

Normally, firms shy away from honest feedback, hoping to maintain a positive atmosphere.

Besides delaying growth, this approach creates confusion.

Because associates value clarity over vague encouragement, avoiding tough conversations hurts far more than it helps.

When feedback only scratches the surface or focuses exclusively on praise, associates miss critical opportunities to adjust, improve, and position themselves for success.

Handled respectfully and constructively, feedback — even when critical — builds resilience.

It teaches associates how to respond to challenges, adapt their approach, and ultimately succeed faster.

Besides developing stronger lawyers, open feedback cultures create more candid, trusting, and agile firms.

4. “As long as compensation decisions are made, the review is complete.”

Normally, firms tie the performance review process directly to compensation decisions, making the conversation transactional rather than developmental.

Because the conversation becomes backward-looking — focused only on past billing numbers or hours — opportunities for career planning vanish.

Besides creating a short-term mindset among associates, this approach discourages real investment in professional growth.

Firms that separate performance discussions from compensation conversations create space for open dialogue about aspirations, skills to develop, leadership opportunities, and long-term goals.

Associates who see a future within the firm — not just a raise — stay committed longer, bring higher discretionary effort, and align their growth with the firm's strategic objectives.

5. “We know how people are doing — we don’t need formal feedback.”

Normally, firms rely on informal impressions — what partners remember, hear in passing, or notice day-to-day — to assess associate performance.

Besides being subjective, this method leads to uneven evaluations where bias, favoritism, or simple forgetfulness can distort the picture.

Because structured feedback systems standardize evaluations and make sure every associate gets fair consideration, formal reviews protect firms legally, reputationally, and culturally.

Good instincts matter — but when critical feedback is left to chance, talented associates slip through the cracks, and morale erodes.

Structured systems don’t eliminate judgment; they sharpen it by anchoring decisions in real patterns, evidence, and collective perspectives.

6. “Performance reviews are about identifying weaknesses.”

Traditionally, many firms approached reviews as opportunities to highlight what someone did wrong.

Normally, these conversations centered around mistakes, gaps, and failings.

Besides creating defensive mindsets, weakness-focused reviews diminish motivation and engagement.

Because positive reinforcement is a stronger driver of behavior change than criticism alone, balancing strengths and areas for development in performance reviews helps associates feel seen, valued, and supported.

Strong reviews highlight what associates already do well — and use that as a foundation for addressing growth areas.

Besides building confidence, this approach speeds up the learning curve, creates loyalty, and transforms reviews from dreaded events into meaningful conversations.

Final Thoughts

Performance reviews can either become your firm's biggest retention tool — or its silent liability.

It depends entirely on whether your firm sees them as a chance to listen, invest, and grow, or merely a formality.

Besides aligning people to the firm's goals, strong review processes clarify expectations, reduce anxiety, and build leadership potential early.

They turn performance management from a reactionary system into a forward-looking leadership pipeline.

Because the firms that lead tomorrow are not necessarily the firms with the biggest brand names today.

They will be the firms that understand — and act on — the fact that developing people is not an HR function; it's a leadership strategy.

Performance reviews aren't about perfection.

They are about building momentum — review by review, conversation by conversation, year after year.

If your firm's performance review system still relies on old assumptions, it might be time to reimagine it as a strategic tool — not just a process.

If you want to structure reviews that build stronger lawyers, better leaders, and a healthier firm culture, let’s talk.Better conversations today build better firms tomorrow.

‍