Redwood Analytics

Four times per year we host the Redwood Forum, which is a chance for Redwood users to get together online and talk about business intelligence, law firm management and finance, and the role our tools play in that space. 

As the market becomes more competitive, we have noticed that firms want to have a more efficient way to evaluate partner performance.  In response, the Think Tank developed a methodology to objectively measure performance based on key metrics.  This will help firms understand certain areas where a partner excels or falls short, which can be useful for a firm's development plan.  Firms may also use the methodology for compensation planning to illuminate important firm goals. 

Initially the Think Tank identified metrics that firms would want their partners to deliver, specifically: new business origination from new and existing clients; cross selling; managing client relationships (hours owned and managed, realization, and margin); managing associates; client satisfaction (client attrition rates); and hours worked.  These metrics can be measured over various timeframes.

Based on feedback from firms in the Think Tank, we decided that not all metrics are equal in value.  For example, origination may be more important than cross selling to a firm but the opposite may be true for other firms; therefore, the scorecard's weighted metrics are customizable based on the desires of individual firms.  

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figures 1 & 2 are examples of what a partner scorecard might look like.  On the vertical plane on Figure 1, partners 1-25 and the various metrics are compared.  All metrics culminate to determine a "total score" for each partner.  The total score in turn would be the objective value a firm could use to compare partners.  The metrics can be measured by absolute criteria, meaning that a partner must work (x) hours to achieve a certain score, or they can be based on relative criteria by looking at how well the firm performed as a whole and then perform an analysis for each partner relative to firm success. 

Firms can also group partners within the scorecard based on similar scores for various metrics to be able to create a partner profile.  This allows a firm to compare apples to apples when looking at different metrics by differentiating partners that may be rainmakers as opposed to those that specialize in litigation.     

The Think Tank is looking for feedback on this concept.  Are there changes that could be made that would make this analysis more valuable?  (Note: 100% of Forum attendees that responded stated they would find value in this concept.)  This analysis has been performed for firms that participate in the Think Tank; however, we are looking for feedback from all Redwood Clients.  If you want more information regarding the Partner Scorecard, please contact the Think Tank.