Who is best placed to improve legal staff if its performance is deficient? Usually, all fingers point to the legal instructor or trainer.
Surprisingly in 80% of the situations it is the manager and supervisors who are the one’s to look at(Rummler and Brache, 2013) . Not legal staff itself and not the legal instructor.
Provided necessary skills and knowledge are sufficient (true in 80% of underperformance), deficient performance is a management problem. And it is not about improving legal staff itself but about the processess and circumstances related to working conditions of legal staff.
Just look at the factors most important for determining performance:
| Factor | Description | Responsible stakeholder |
| Clear performance specifications | Outputs, standards and results for performers to attain | Managers and supervisors |
| Necessary resources and support | Signals to act, priorities, tools information, responsibility, lack of task interference, practice opportunities | idem |
| Appropriate consequences | Recognition, rewards, incentives that are meaningful to performers | idem |
| Timely and relevant feedback | Timely, relevant , specific information on how well performance meets specifications | idem |
| Individual capability | The right person in the job: physical, mental, emotional abilities to perform | idem |
Why are these factors crucial?
- Without clear performance specifications, outputs and achievement of standards would be inconsistent.
- Without necessary resources and support, performance would be delayed, sporadic, and perhaps below standards.
- Without appropriate consequences, motivation and incentives for successful performance would be absent.
- Without timely and relevant feedback, performers would not know whether they were performing well or poorly.
- Without individual capability, performs would not have the capacity for effective performance.
Conclusion: When insufficient legal performance is registered, think twice before getting the training department involved.