Peter G Glenn, “The Shared Responsibility for Effective Supervisory Relationships in Law Practice”

In this paper, Peter Glenn discusses effective supervisory relationships within the context of legal practice. He uses Attorney Grievance Commission v Kimmel, 955 A 2d 269 (Md 2008) to demonstrate a relationship where incompetence by partners and their associate resulted in an ineffective supervisory relationship that caused a substantial number of instances of malpractice and the destruction of the associate’s legal career.

“Kimmel illustrates the relationship between the incompetent conduct of supervising partners and the incompetent and wrongful conduct of a supervised associate and their shared responsibilities for the effectiveness of their supervisory relationship. The case illustrates the importance of knowledgeable delegation decisions, appropriate levels of oversight and monitoring, and free, honest, and helpful communication between the partner and associate. Statements of good practice should address each of those important aspects of supervisory relationships” (144).

Furthermore, three major aspects of a supervisory relationship are analyzed. These include:

1. The delegation decision;
2. The delegation conversation, or assignment hand-off; and
3. Ongoing oversight and communication, including feedback.

During the delegation discussion, the question of who the work is to be assigned to must be asked. Then, a “backward planning process” occurs, where the client’s final or intermediate objective is identified, and the steps required to achieve that objective are considered. Before providing the supervisees with the task, they must be sure that they understand the work necessary to complete the task so that they can effectively plan for the supervision of that work and more effectively monitor the supervisees’ efforts.

The work is then assigned by way of a delegation conversation. This conversation ensures that the supervisor and supervisee have a shared, accurate understanding of the essential elements of the assignment and ensures the supervisee is highly motivated and engaged in the work. A supervisor can promote supervisee engagement by using motivational prompts in delegation conversations. When done effectively, delegation conversations are an investment in better and more efficient work for clients. Finally, in an effective supervisory relationship, supervisors regularly engage in oversight and ongoing communication with the supervisee. Supervisors should take proactive steps, distinct from merely reactive or passive measures, that ensure the delegated work is being performed. The supervisor’s monitoring and oversight measures should include regular meetings and conversations with the supervisee, which should stimulate the associate’s continued engagement in the work, foster an environment of questions and responses to facilitate the supervisee’s work, and provide feedback.

Peter G Glenn, “The Shared Responsibility for Effective Supervisory Relationships in Law Practice” (2023) 47:2 J Legal Prof 123.