An attorney 360-degree review asks a lawyer's peers, supervising partners, direct reports and sometimes clients to rate the same set of behaviors, so the firm sees performance from every angle instead of one partner's view. A complete instrument covers seven areas: legal work quality, client service, leadership and supervision, collaboration, business development, professional conduct and respect. Each area should carry three to six behavior-based questions plus one open-text prompt. This guide gives you a full 2026 question bank across all seven, versions for self-assessment and by seniority, and the phrasing rules that get honest answers.
Use it as a starting library. Cut what does not fit your firm, keep the scale consistent, and resist the urge to ask everything at once.
What areas should an attorney 360 review actually measure?
Measure behaviors the firm can coach, not personality. A useful attorney 360 covers seven competencies: technical and legal work, client service, supervision and mentoring, collaboration and firm citizenship, business development, professional conduct and respect for colleagues. Each competency should carry three to six behavior-anchored questions on a consistent scale, plus one open-text prompt. Keep the whole instrument under about 40 rated items so raters finish it thoughtfully rather than clicking through.
Two design decisions shape everything else. First, the rating scale: a 5-point behavioral scale (from "rarely demonstrates" to "consistently demonstrates") produces more usable data than a 1 to 10 numeric scale, which invites raters to cluster in the safe middle. Second, the rater mix: the same person should be rated by several perspectives, so the instrument needs to read naturally whether a partner, a peer or a junior is answering.
What legal work and quality questions should you ask?
These measure the substance of the lawyer's output. Rate how consistently the attorney:
- Produces accurate, well-reasoned work with minimal rework
- Spots legal and commercial risks before they become problems
- Manages matter deadlines and communicates slippage early
- Applies feedback from prior matters to new work
- Balances thoroughness against efficiency and cost
- Handles complex or novel issues without excessive escalation
- Writes and drafts clearly for the intended audience
What client-service questions belong in the review?
These capture how the attorney shows up for the people paying the bills. Rate how consistently the attorney:
- Understands the client's business goals, not just the legal question
- Responds to client communications within a reasonable window
- Explains complex issues in language the client can act on
- Anticipates needs rather than waiting to be asked
- Protects the relationship under pressure or bad news
- Manages client expectations on scope, timing and cost
- Represents the firm professionally in every client interaction
What leadership and supervision questions work for partners and senior associates?
This is where upward reviews live, and where they most often break down. Associates evaluate the partners who control their assignments and bonuses, so phrasing matters. Rate how consistently the person:
- Delegates work with clear context and expectations
- Gives feedback that is specific, timely and usable
- Makes junior lawyers feel safe raising problems
- Distributes desirable work fairly across the team
- Credits others' contributions accurately
- Is available and approachable when the team needs guidance
- Develops people rather than only extracting output
Phrase upward-review items around observable behavior ("gives feedback that is specific and timely") rather than judgment ("is a good leader"). Behavior-anchored items lower the stakes and reduce the score-clustering that flattens every partner to the same satisfactory rating.
What collaboration and firm-citizenship questions should you include?
These measure how the attorney strengthens the wider firm. Rate how consistently the attorney:
- Shares knowledge and precedent rather than hoarding it
- Supports colleagues across practice groups and offices
- Contributes to firm initiatives beyond billable work
- Responds helpfully to internal requests from other teams
- Puts firm interests ahead of individual credit when they conflict
What business-development questions belong in a 360?
Often skipped for junior lawyers, but useful from senior associate upward. Rate how consistently the attorney:
- Builds and maintains client relationships that generate work
- Contributes to pitches, proposals and cross-selling
- Raises the firm's profile through writing, speaking or networking
- Identifies and pursues opportunities within existing clients
- Collaborates on origination rather than guarding contacts
What professional-conduct and respect questions matter?
These protect the firm's culture and its risk profile. Rate how consistently the attorney:
- Models the firm's stated values under deadline pressure
- Raises ethical, conflict or compliance concerns promptly
- Treats staff and administrative colleagues with respect
- Gives and receives feedback without defensiveness
- Maintains composure and professionalism in difficult moments
How should the self-assessment version be worded?
Mirror every rated item into the first person so the lawyer scores themselves on the same behaviors, then compare self-ratings against rater averages. The gap is the most coaching-rich part of a 360. For example, "gives feedback that is specific and timely" becomes "I give feedback that is specific and timely." Self-assessment is consistently one of the highest-engagement parts of a review, because people are more invested in a result they helped produce, so it is worth building the mirrored set rather than skipping it.
How should questions change by seniority?
Weight the competencies to the role. A junior associate 360 leans on legal work, responsiveness and collaboration, with light or no business-development items. A senior associate adds supervision and early business development. A partner 360 centers on leadership, upward feedback, firm citizenship and origination, with technical questions reframed around oversight rather than production. Keep the core behaviors constant across levels so results stay comparable year over year, and adjust emphasis rather than rewriting the instrument for each person.
What open-text questions get honest answers?
Two or three open prompts outperform ten. Ask:
- What is one thing this attorney should keep doing?
- What is one specific change that would make them more effective?
- Is there anything the firm should know that scores alone would miss?
Keep open prompts optional and clearly confidential. Raters who fear their comments can be traced back to them write vaguer, kinder feedback, which is exactly the drift that makes reviews useless.
Building your review from scratch? Survey Research Associates (SRA) maintains a validated attorney 360 question library mapped to PQE level and role, with anonymity thresholds built in so small teams stay confidential. Download the free 40-question attorney 360 starter bank.
What rating scale should you use?
Use a 5-point behavioral frequency scale with a clear anchor at each point, plus a "not observed" option. A frequency scale ("rarely" to "consistently") outperforms an agreement scale ("strongly disagree" to "strongly agree") for behavior questions, because it asks raters to report what they have seen rather than form an opinion. Always include "not observed" so raters do not guess, which is one of the most common sources of noise in 360 data.
How many questions and raters is right?
Past roughly 40 rated items, completion quality drops and raters satisfice. A practical structure is 25 to 35 rated questions across the competencies, three open-text prompts, and one overall behavioral summary item. For raters, aim for six to ten spanning partners, peers and direct reports. Fewer than four makes anonymity hard to protect; more than about twelve adds little new signal and slows the cycle.
What mistakes ruin attorney 360 data?
Five recurring ones. Long cycles that run six months, so feedback is already historical by the time the partner conversation happens. Weak anonymity, which makes associates write cautiously about the partners who control their assignments. Numeric scales that push everyone to the middle. Too many questions, which causes rushed answers. And no follow-through, where reports sit on file until the next cycle instead of driving coaching or staffing changes. Any one of these can hollow out an otherwise well-designed instrument.
How do you turn results into action?
Compare each person's self-assessment against rater averages, look for the widest gaps, and pick one or two behaviors to work on rather than the whole report. Share themes, not raw comments, to protect anonymity. Then close the loop: schedule the follow-up conversation quickly, agree on specific changes, and check progress before the next cycle. Review programs create the most value when firms use the feedback to make timely decisions, not when they simply collect it.
Frequently asked questions
How many raters should an attorney 360 include?
Aim for six to ten raters spanning partners, peers and direct reports. Fewer than four makes anonymity hard to protect; more than about twelve adds little new signal and slows the cycle.
Should partners be reviewed by associates in the same instrument?
Yes, but hold upward-review responses to an anonymity threshold, commonly three to five respondents before results are shown, so associates can answer candidly about the people who control their assignments.
How often should firms run attorney 360 reviews?
Most firms run a full 360 annually and lighter pulse check-ins between cycles. Long cycles that run six months hand partners feedback that is already historical, so shorter loops help intervention happen while it still matters.
Are numeric or behavioral rating scales better?
Behavioral frequency scales anchored to observable actions produce less mid-scale clustering than 1 to 10 numeric scales and give partners something concrete to coach against.
Should the 360 include a self-assessment?
Yes. Mirroring each rated item into the first person lets you compare self-ratings against rater averages, and the gap between them is usually the most useful coaching signal in the whole review.
Can you benchmark attorney 360 results against other firms?
Yes, if your questions map to a standardized competency model. Bespoke one-off questionnaires are hard to benchmark, which is one reason firms move toward validated libraries.
How long should the whole 360 cycle take?
Faster is better. A cycle that runs from launch to feedback conversation in six to eight weeks keeps the data current; six-month cycles hand partners feedback that describes a lawyer who has already moved on.
About Survey Research Associates (SRA) Survey Research Associates (SRA) has designed and administered upward reviews, 360-degree evaluations and engagement surveys for US and international law firms since 1987. Our instruments are built around law firm structures, from PQE-based eligibility to partner-level anonymity thresholds. Talk to our team about your next review cycle. or get our monthly law firm evaluation brief in your inbox.
Related posts
- How Long Should a Law Firm 360 Review Cycle Take?
- Upward Reviews: How to Protect Associate Anonymity in Small Teams
- Self-Assessment Questions Every Associate Review Should Include
- Why Law Firm Upward Reviews Fail (and How to Fix the Process)
.jpg)
.png){kind=small}