In a well-designed upward review, very few people see any individual response. The independent administrator who runs the survey works with the raw answers. The partner being reviewed gets a summary of the themes from everyone who rated them. Firm leadership and the professional development team see group-level results. When reporting thresholds are in place, individual answers stay with the administrator.
Associates ask this question often, and it is a good sign when they do. Knowing who sees what helps people give the open feedback that makes the program worth running.
The short version
- Individual responses stay with the independent administrator.
- Partners get themes and average ratings, not a list of who said what.
- Firm leadership sees group-level results, where patterns across practice groups show up.
- Reporting thresholds mean results are only shared once enough people have responded.
- Explaining this before the survey opens is one of the best ways to lift participation.
What is an upward review?
An upward review is a process where associates give structured feedback on the partners they work with. It usually covers supervision, feedback, work allocation and development support. It sits alongside the standard review, where partners evaluate associates, and shows partners how their day-to-day style is experienced by the people on their matters.
Who sees individual upward review responses?
When an outside party runs the program, that administrator is the only one who works with individual responses. The firm gets reports instead of raw data.
Outside administration is already normal in law firm evaluations. The NALP Foundation's November 2025 study of associate performance evaluations at 106 leading law firms found that 76% use an external or third-party solution to collect evaluation feedback. 31% use internally developed surveys and 7% use both.
This is what allows associates to speak freely. They are answering an outside organization rather than their employer, and their answers stay outside the firm's systems. If your firm runs the survey on an internal platform, decide from the start who can open the response file, then tell participants what you decided. Our guide to managed performance review services covers the difference between the two setups.
What does the partner being reviewed see?
Partners get a report on their own results. It covers average ratings on each competency, how those ratings compare with the firm or practice group average, and written comments grouped into themes.
The value is in the pattern. When several associates describe the same thing, such as helpful matter briefings, that tells a partner something useful. One comment on its own carries much less weight. That is why good reports show themes instead of a transcript.
What does firm leadership or the PD team see?
Leadership and professional development teams see group-level results: firm-wide averages, practice group comparisons and trends over time.
This is where an upward review does its most useful work. Group data shows where supervision is strong, which practice groups could use more training and how things are moving year to year. Individual partner reports usually go to that partner, and sometimes to their practice group leader or a member of firm management, depending on how the firm set the program up.
| Who | What they usually see |
|---|---|
| Independent administrator | Individual responses, used to build the reports |
| Partner reviewed | Their own average ratings and themed comments |
| Practice group leader | Their group's results, plus individual partner reports where the firm has agreed to that |
| Firm leadership and PD | Firm-wide and practice group summaries and trends |
| Other associates | Nothing individual, and often a firm-wide summary of what the program found |
Is upward review feedback anonymous or confidential?
The two words mean different things, and associates appreciate the distinction.
Anonymous means the administrator cannot link a response to a person. Confidential means responses are linked to a person for administration, and that link is held securely and never shared with the firm.
Many programs are confidential rather than strictly anonymous. The administrator needs to know who worked with which partner and who still needs a reminder. Say which model you use and what it means in practice.
Can a partner figure out who said what?
Programs are designed to prevent that. Four choices make it work.
- Reporting thresholds. A partner's results are only reported once enough associates have responded. The firm and the administrator set the number before the cycle opens.
- Themed comments. Written answers are grouped by topic, and details that could identify a matter or a person are edited out.
- Average scores. Ratings are averaged rather than listed one by one.
- Set timing. Reports go out after the cycle closes, so answers cannot be matched to the order they arrived.
What happens when only a few associates work with a partner?
This comes up in small practice groups and is easy to plan for. Firms usually hold that partner's report until two cycles can be combined, report the results inside a larger group or release the written themes once the threshold is met. Decide this in advance and say so in the invitation. Associates in small teams will take part with more confidence.
Give associates a clear answer about who sees their feedback. Survey Research Associates (SRA) runs upward review programs as an independent administrator, with anonymity thresholds and aggregate reporting built for law firm practice groups.
Do upward review results affect a partner's compensation?
It varies by firm, and associates want to know the answer.
Many firms use the data for development: coaching, training plans and leadership support. Others treat it as one input into partner evaluation. Both work when the purpose is stated openly, because associates answer based on what they believe the data is for. Upward feedback is also one of the measures firms track beyond billable hours.
How should firms explain this before the survey opens?
A short note in the invitation answers most questions. Cover five things:
- Who runs the survey and where the responses are held.
- Whether the program is anonymous or confidential, in plain terms.
- The reporting threshold, and what happens in small groups.
- Who gets which report, from the partner to firm leadership.
- How the results will be used, and when associates will hear the outcome.
Sharing a summary afterward matters just as much. When associates see that their feedback led to something, participation usually rises the next year. Our attorney performance review guide covers how firms structure these programs end to end.
Frequently asked questions
Who sees upward review responses at a law firm?
The independent administrator works with individual responses. Partners get their own average ratings and themed comments. Firm leadership sees group summaries. With thresholds in place, no one at the firm sees an individual associate's answers.
Can partners find out who said what?
Programs are designed to prevent it. Reporting thresholds, averaged ratings, themed comments and edited verbatims work together to keep responses private.
Can HR see raw upward review data?
With an independently run program, HR and PD teams get reports rather than raw responses. If the survey runs on an internal system, the firm decides who has access, and that decision should be shared with associates first.
What is a reporting threshold?
It is the number of responses needed before a partner's results are reported. The firm and the administrator set it in advance. It keeps results meaningful and protects each response.
Does the firm keep upward review data year to year?
Most firms keep results to track progress, usually at the report level rather than the individual response level. Agree retention with your administrator and mention it in the invitation.
How common is anonymous feedback in law firm evaluations?
Both models are in regular use. The NALP Foundation's November 2025 study of 106 leading law firms found that 48% include attributed qualitative feedback, 39% provide only anonymous feedback and 14% vary by situation.
Survey Research Associates (SRA) has designed and administered upward reviews, 360-degree evaluations, self-assessments and engagement surveys for US law firms since 1991. Talk to our team about your next review cycle, or get our monthly law firm evaluation brief in your inbox.