Anna learns what guidance actually sounds like when it’s intentional.
Anna arrived at Ellen Park’s office exactly on time, though she’d been standing in the hallway for the past three minutes.
Ellen was a partner in the corporate practice. Anna had worked with Ellen twice, both times on mid-sized M&A deals, where Anna handled due diligence and drafted ancillary agreements. Ellen was exacting but fair. She didn’t over-explain or micromanage.
When Margaret told her that Ellen would be her mentor for the pilot, relief washed over her. At least it was someone in her practice area, but she still didn’t know what to expect.
She knocked.
“Come in,” Ellen said, looking up from her desk. She gestured toward the small conference table by the window. “Let’s sit here.”
Anna noticed that Ellen had already set out two copies of a one-page agenda titled “Monthly Mentorship Meeting – Session 1.”
The Framework
Ellen slid one copy across the table.
“Susan provided this structure for our monthly meetings,” Ellen said. “Each session has three parts, and we have one hour. The goal isn’t to solve everything today – it’s to establish a pattern of clarity over six months.”
Anna scanned the page:
Part 1: Review (15 minutes)
What matters have you worked on this month? What decisions did you make independently? Where did you seek guidance, and why?
Part 2: Interpretation (30 minutes)
How are partners interpreting your work? What signals are you sending (intentionally or unintentionally)? What is the firm evaluating at your level?
Part 3: Forward Planning (15 minutes)
What development opportunity will you focus on this month? What support do you need? How will we measure progress?
“This isn’t a performance review,” Ellen said. “It’s a translation. I’m here to help you understand how the firm interprets your work and what it’s actually evaluating.”
Something in the room shifted. This wasn’t going to be a casual check-in. It was structured and intentional.
Part 1: Review
“So,” Ellen said, glancing at her watch. “What have you been working on this month?”
Anna reviewed her recent matters: a securities offering for a healthcare client, a joint-venture agreement for a tech startup, and ongoing regulatory work for a financial services company.
“Good,” Ellen said. “Now tell me about a decision you made on your own, something you didn’t get your partner’s approval for before acting.”
Anna paused. The question felt like a trap.
“It’s not a trick,” Ellen said, sensing her hesitation. “I’m trying to understand where you’re already demonstrating ownership.”
Anna thought for a moment. “Regarding the joint venture deal, the client wanted broader indemnification coverage than the other side would accept. I restructured the provisions into a tiered system with different caps for each risk category. I drafted the provisions, wrote a memo explaining the rationale, and sent them to opposing counsel.”
“Without running it by the partner first?” Ellen asked.
“No,” Anna said. “I included the partner on the email, but I didn’t wait for approval.” She added, “I didn’t wait for approval.”
Ellen made a note. “Did it work?”
“Yes, both sides signed off.”
Ellen looked up. “That’s ownership. That’s what we’re looking for at your level.”
Anna blinked. She’d half-expected Ellen to say she should have asked first.
Part 2: Interpretation
Ellen set her pen down and leaned back slightly.
“Here’s what I want you to understand about the mid-level stage,” she said. “At your level, the firm is watching for three things, not billable hours or responsiveness. Those are table stakes.”
She wrote three words on her notepad, then turned it toward Anna and said, “This is what the firm is looking for at your level.”
Judgment
Efficiency
Ownership
“Let me explain each one,” Ellen said.
Judgment: “Can you identify the issue that matters most and resolve it without creating new problems? The indemnification decision you made demonstrated sound judgment. You understood the core tension and found a solution both sides could accept.”
Efficiency: “Can you move the work forward without constant partner input? You didn’t wait for me to tell you how to resolve the indemnification issue. You resolved it and kept the deal moving.”
Ownership: “Do you treat the matter as your own, or are you waiting to be told what to do? You took responsibility for solving the problem. That’s ownership.”
She wrote quickly.
“Most associates at your level don’t realize that these three things are what we’re evaluating,” Ellen continued. “They think we’re watching for hours, speed, or technical precision. Those things matter, but they’re baseline. What we’re really evaluating is whether you’re ready to run matters on your own.”
Anna looked up. “I didn’t know that.”
“I know,” Ellen said. “No one told you. That’s what this pilot is meant to fix.”
What the Firm Is Evaluating
Ellen continued. “Let me be even more specific. At the mid-level stage, the firm assesses whether you can do three things:”
1. Run a matter without a partner on every call.
“Can you staff it, manage the timeline, communicate with the client, and escalate only when necessary? Not every matter, obviously. But can you handle a straightforward deal or case from start to finish?”
2. Make judgment calls in real time.
“When something unexpected happens, can you assess the risk, propose a solution, and execute without waiting for permission?”
3. Think like a business advisor, not just a lawyer.
“Can you understand what the client is trying to accomplish and help them get there, even if it means saying no to what they initially asked for?”
Ellen leaned forward. “None of this is written down, and none of it is in the associate handbook. But it’s what separates the associates who make partner from those who plateau.”
Anna had never heard it expressed so clearly before.
“The 85/15 Model that Susan explained at orientation,” Ellen added, “is designed to give you time to develop these capabilities. You can’t build judgment, efficiency, and ownership if you’re billing 2,000 hours and handling everything else on nights and weekends.”
Part 3: Forward Planning
Ellen glanced at her watch. “We have fifteen minutes left. Let’s discuss what you want to focus on this month.”
“Based on what we just discussed,” Anna said slowly, “I want to run a matter from start to finish without a partner reviewing every deliverable.”
“Good,” Ellen said. “That’s specific and measurable. What would it require?”
“A partner willing to let me.”
Ellen smiled slightly. “I have a private placement coming in next week. It’s a straightforward structure with low risk. You’ll run it. I’ll be available for questions, but I won’t review anything unless you ask me to.”
Her pulse quickened.
“Here’s the deal,” Ellen said. “You’ll draft the documents, coordinate with the client and opposing counsel, manage the timeline, and close the deal. If anything goes wrong, we’ll debrief at our next meeting. But you’re running the show.”
“What if I make a mistake?” Anna asked.
“Then you’ll learn from it,” Ellen said. “That’s the point. You can’t develop judgment without making decisions, and you can’t make decisions if someone is always checking your work.”
She made a note in her notebook. “This is your development opportunity for the month. We’ll review how it went in Session 2.”
Strategic Investment Time
Ellen pulled out another sheet of paper. “One more thing before we wrap up. Susan asked me to make sure you understand how to track your Strategic Investment Time.”
She slid the paper across. It was a simple weekly template:
Week of: __________
Billable Hours: ______
Strategic Investment Hours: ______
Strategic Investment Activities This Week:
• Business development (networking, articles, events)
• Leadership development (mentorship meetings, workshops, coaching)
• Internal development (training, cross-practice collaboration)
• Firm citizenship (recruiting, bar association, pro bono)
“Track your time for the next month,” Ellen said. “Not retroactively, just going forward. At our next meeting, we’ll review the pattern. We’ll see whether your 15% is intentional or accidental and whether it’s building the capabilities you need for partnership.”
Anna took the template.
“Remember,” Ellen added, “Strategic Investment Time isn’t bonus time. It’s expected time. The firm is giving you permission to invest in your development rather than pretending it happens magically on top of 2,000 billable hours.”
Anna
Walking back to her office, Anna looked down at the papers in her hand: the meeting agenda, the three criteria the firm evaluates, and the weekly tracking template.
For six years, she had been waiting for someone to tell her she was ready.
Ellen hadn’t told her she was ready.
Ellen had given her the opportunity to prove it.
More importantly, Ellen had told her what the firm was actually looking for. Not in vague terms like “leadership” or “initiative,” but in specific, measurable terms: judgment, efficiency, and ownership.
Anna sat at her desk and opened a new email for Ellen:
Subject: Private placement matter
Ellen,
Thank you for the opportunity to run the private placement. I’m ready. Please send me the client contact information, and I’ll schedule the kickoff call.
Anna
She hit send before she could second-guess herself.
Later That Afternoon
Anna ran into Mei in the hallway.
“How was your first mentorship meeting?” Mei asked quietly.
“Different,” Anna said.
Mei nodded. “Mine too. My mentor told me what the firm is actually evaluating. No one had ever said it out loud before.”
“Same,” Anna said. “Judgment, efficiency, and ownership.”
Mei’s eyes widened slightly. “That’s exactly what Robert said.”
They looked at each other.
“They’re all using the same framework,” Anna said slowly.
“Because Susan gave it to them,” Mei replied. “This isn’t accidental mentorship. It’s mentorship by design.”
They didn’t say anything else. They didn’t need to say anything.
They both understood that something had just been named for the first time.
Once something is named, you can’t pretend you don’t see it anymore.
Ellen
Later that afternoon, Ellen sat at her desk and opened an email from Susan.
Subject: After your first mentorship meeting
How did it feel to explain rather than to assume?
Ellen stared at the question for a moment.
Then she typed:
Slower, but clearer. I realized how much I’ve been expecting associates to infer from watching me work. Anna is smart and capable, but she didn’t know what we were actually evaluating. Now she does.
I gave her a matter to run independently. We’ll see what happens.
She hit send.
Susan replied within minutes:
That’s the point. Development requires both opportunity and clarity about what success looks like. You just gave her both.
The MSL Saga™, MLARD™, and the 85/15 Model™ are trademarks of Susan B. Silverman Consulting. The MSL Saga and all episodes © 2026 Susan B. Silverman Consulting. All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution is prohibited.
