Stop Writing Policies to Avoid Difficult Conversations

One employee abuses the PTO policy.

So leadership tightens PTO rules for everyone.

One employee isn't productive while working from home.

So the firm eliminates remote work.

One person consistently pushes the limits of a flexible schedule.

So leadership implements strict office hours.

One attorney repeatedly misses deadlines.

So the firm creates another approval process.

I've seen versions of this play out over and over again.

And every time, I find myself asking the same question:

Does this firm actually need another policy?

Or is leadership trying to avoid one difficult conversation?

Because those are two very different problems.

Policies Are Sometimes Necessary

Let me start by saying this:

Law firms need policies.

Of course they do.

Clear policies create consistency.

They establish expectations.

They provide guidance.

They protect both the firm and its employees.

There are absolutely situations where a firm-wide policy is the appropriate solution.

But not every employee problem is a policy problem.

Sometimes it's just an employee problem.

And that's where leadership has to be willing to lead.

One Person Abuses a Privilege. Everyone Loses It.

This is one of the most frustrating patterns I see.

A firm offers flexibility.

Ninety-five percent of the team handles it responsibly.

They get their work done.

They meet expectations.

They remain responsive.

Clients are happy.

Then one person takes advantage.

Suddenly leadership starts questioning the entire policy.

"Maybe we need everyone back in the office."

"Maybe we need stricter PTO approval."

"Maybe we need to monitor schedules more closely."

The firm responds to the behavior of one person by restricting everyone else.

And the people who were doing exactly what they were supposed to do?

They pay the price.

Don't Write a Policy to Avoid a Conversation

Sometimes the simplest solution is also the most uncomfortable.

Have the conversation.

If someone is abusing PTO, address it.

If someone isn't productive while working remotely, address their performance.

If someone is consistently unavailable during hours when they're expected to be responsive, address the expectation.

If an attorney repeatedly misses deadlines, address the attorney.

Coach them.

Set clear expectations.

Document the issue if necessary.

Use an individual write-up if appropriate.

And if the behavior doesn't improve, make the harder personnel decision.

But don't redesign the entire workplace because one person isn't meeting expectations.

If It Can Be Solved With a Conversation, It Probably Doesn't Need a New Policy

This is one of the questions I wish more leadership teams would ask.

Before adding another rule, ask:

Can this problem be solved with a conversation?

If the answer is yes, start there.

Maybe the employee genuinely doesn't understand the expectation.

Maybe the manager hasn't communicated clearly.

Maybe the person needs coaching.

Or maybe they're simply not performing at the level the role requires.

All of those are management issues.

None necessarily require a new paragraph in the employee handbook.

Policies Can Become a Substitute for Leadership

This is where the issue becomes bigger than HR.

When leaders are uncomfortable addressing individual performance, policies can become an easy escape.

Instead of saying:

"You're not meeting our expectations."

Leadership says:

"We're changing the policy."

Instead of telling one employee:

"Your performance while working remotely isn't acceptable."

Leadership tells everyone:

"We're eliminating remote work."

The uncomfortable conversation disappears.

But so does some of the team's trust.

The policy solved the leadership discomfort.

It didn't necessarily solve the real problem.

The Message to Your Best Employees

Leadership may believe a stricter policy communicates:

"We're improving accountability."

Your best employees may hear something very different.

They may hear:

"We don't trust you."

That's particularly damaging when those employees have consistently demonstrated good judgment.

They've earned strong performance reviews.

They meet deadlines.

They take care of clients.

They don't abuse flexibility.

And now their autonomy is being reduced because someone else did.

Over time, that creates resentment.

Every Policy Creates Friction

Policies aren't free.

Every additional rule creates some amount of organizational friction.

Maybe it's small.

An extra approval.

Another form.

A new tracking requirement.

An additional step.

But those things accumulate.

Eventually, a firm can create so many policies designed to prevent bad behavior that it makes life unnecessarily difficult for the people who were behaving responsibly all along.

That's the irony.

The employees who need the least oversight often feel the greatest burden of excessive policies.

You Can Accidentally Train People Not to Use Judgment

There's another unintended consequence of over-policing an organization.

People stop thinking.

When every possible scenario has a rule, employees learn to follow the rule instead of exercising judgment.

They ask:

"What's the policy?"

instead of:

"What's the right thing to do?"

That's not the culture I want to build.

Law firms employ professionals.

Attorneys.

Paralegals.

Administrators.

Experienced staff.

These are people who should be capable of exercising reasonable judgment.

They should be treated accordingly.

Professionals Should Be Treated Like Professionals

My philosophy is relatively simple.

Hire good people.

Set clear expectations.

Give them the tools they need.

Trust them to do their jobs.

Measure performance.

Hold them accountable.

If someone consistently demonstrates that they can't exercise reasonable judgment within that framework, then address that individual.

Because at some point, the question isn't:

"Do we need a better policy?"

It's:

"Do we have the right person?"

And leadership needs to be willing to ask that question.

A Write-Up Is Sometimes the Right Answer

There's a strange tendency in some organizations to view formal performance management as overly harsh.

So instead of documenting an individual's behavior, leadership changes the rules for everyone.

I would argue that's often less fair.

If one person repeatedly violates expectations, an individual write-up provides:

• clarity

• documentation

• an opportunity to improve

• accountability

It addresses the actual issue with the actual person.

A company-wide policy, on the other hand, may affect dozens of employees who had nothing to do with the problem.

This Is Ultimately About Leadership Courage

It's easy to write a policy.

It's much harder to sit across from someone and say:

"This isn't working."

Or:

"Your performance isn't meeting expectations."

Or:

"You've abused the flexibility we've given you."

Those conversations are uncomfortable.

But leadership isn't about eliminating discomfort.

Sometimes leadership is the willingness to walk directly into it.

As I've discussed before, many operational problems inside law firms are actually leadership problems in disguise.

This is one of them.

Manage the Person. Don't Redesign the Organization Around Them.

If one employee can't handle remote work responsibly, manage that employee.

If one person abuses PTO, manage that person.

If one attorney can't meet deadlines without constant oversight, address that attorney.

Don't automatically create a more restrictive workplace for everyone else.

Because when you design your organization around your lowest performer, you risk creating an environment your highest performers no longer want to work in.

The Real Question

The next time someone suggests adding a policy, pause.

Ask:

"Are we solving a system problem—or avoiding a management conversation?"

If multiple people are experiencing the same issue, expectations are genuinely unclear, or the organization needs consistency, then yes.

You may need a policy.

But if the problem is one person?

Have the conversation.

Coach them.

Write them up if necessary.

Hold them accountable.

Then move forward.

Controversial Truth

A handbook should support your culture.

It shouldn't compensate for leadership's unwillingness to have uncomfortable conversations.

Strong cultures aren't built by creating a rule for every possible situation.

They're built through:

• trust

• judgment

• accountability

• clear expectations

• courageous leadership

Sometimes the best policy is no new policy at all.

Sometimes you just need to manage the person.

If your law firm keeps adding policies, approvals, and restrictions but still struggles with accountability, the answer may not be more rules.

It may be stronger management.

I help law firms build operational structures that create clarity and accountability without unnecessary bureaucracy—so high performers have the autonomy to thrive, managers have the tools to lead, and individual performance issues are addressed where they belong.