MHPR Advisors

Closing soon: Your last chance to participate in the 2026 Equity Partner Contribution & Compensation Survey. If you're in an equity partner in a professional services partnership, please complete our 2026 Equity Partner Contribution & Compensation Survey You will receive a complimentary copy of the full research report, as well as invitations to exclusive online and in-person briefings. All responses are strictly confidential and completion takes around 15–20 minutes. Link in comments. #PartnerRemuneration #ProfessionalServices #EquityPartners #PartnerPerformance #FirmLeadership #HRLeadership #PerformanceManagement #SmartCollaboration #PartnerReward Collaboration partners: Chilli IQ, Gardner & Co., Global Legal Leaders, HR Minds, Managing Partners' Forum, The Openside Group, People in Law, Pickering Pearce, PSFI, Smarter Collaboration International.

Financial incentives are rarely enough to motivate collaboration among partners. Most firms still assume profit share will do the heavy lifting. In this video, Michael Roch highlights three areas for consideration: 1.     Compensation sets the baseline. Joint outcomes must count in tangible financial compensation outcomes. But compensation does not drive collaboration on its own. 2.     Non-financial drivers carry more weight. Reputation. Visibility. Peer respect. These shape behavior far more than most firms admit. 3.     Top firms design for reinforcement. Leaders of the best firms celebrate teams, not only heroes. That is what builds trust and consistent collaboration. The message is simple. Compensation supports collaboration. It does not create it. Download our latest whitepaper (link in comments) on how partner compensation systems undermine collaboration and how to fix them. If this resonates, let’s talk. #PartnerCompensation #PartnerReward #Collaboration

Thinking about extending your partner review cycle? Read this before you do. Some professional services firms want to move from annual to biennial partner reviews to reduce administrative burden. It sounds efficient. It sounds logical. It rarely works. I advise professional services firms on partner compensation. I see this pattern across law firms, accounting firms and consultancies. Partner reviews are not an administrative process. Done well, they can be the partnership’s primary growth driver. When firms stretch the review cycle, three predictable problems emerge: • Market reactions slow • Leaders delay difficult conversations • Long-term priorities lose momentum The underlying problem: firms assume that the partner performance review cycle and the partner compensation cycle must be the same. This is not always the case. In the article below I explain: • Three problems caused by extending partner review cycles • Three elements of an effective partner review cycle • When to shorten contribution reviews. Lengthen profit-share decisions If you lead a professional services partnership, shorten your partner review cycle and lengthen your partner compensation cycle. Access the full article below. #PartnerCompensation #PartnerContribution #Partnerships #ReviewCycles

𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶 𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘇𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝗴𝗹𝗶 𝗦𝘁𝘂𝗱𝗶 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗳𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹𝗶: 𝗶𝗹 𝗻𝗼𝗱𝗼 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗰𝗼 𝗱𝗲𝗹 𝗽𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗮𝗴𝗴𝗶𝗼 𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘇𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹𝗲 Ogni volta che in uno studio professionale si apre una fase di discontinuità – una diversa visione strategica, la promozione di nuovi soci, l’ingresso di un lateral hire, un passaggio generazionale – prima o poi emerge una domanda che non è mai solo tecnica: 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗼𝗻𝗼 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗯𝘂𝗶𝘁𝗶 𝗶 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶 𝘁𝗿𝗮 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗻𝗲𝗿? È un tema che tocca equilibri, identità e futuro dello studio molto più di quanto si ammetta apertamente. E spesso è il punto in cui la strategia dichiarata incontra (o si scontra con) il sistema di remunerazione dei partner. A questo proposito, ho trovato particolarmente stimolante il white paper “𝙏𝙝𝙚 𝙏𝙤𝙥 𝟭𝟬 𝙒𝙖𝙮𝙨 𝙔𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙋𝙖𝙧𝙩𝙣𝙚𝙧 𝘾𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙚𝙣𝙨𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙎𝙮𝙨𝙩𝙚𝙢 𝙐𝙣𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙢𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙨 𝘾𝙤𝙡𝙡𝙖𝙗𝙤𝙧𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 – 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙃𝙤𝙬 𝙩𝙤 𝙁𝙞𝙭 𝙏𝙝𝙚𝙢” di Heidi K. Gardner, Michael Roch e Ivan Matviak e ho pensato di farne una sintesi sperando di stimolare la discussione. https://lnkd.in/dh6rZpYU Gli autori partono da un dato che invita a riflettere: la collaborazione è al centro delle strategie dichiarate dalla grande maggioranza degli studi (80%) ma poi meno del 5% dei sistemi di remunerazione dei partner è progettato con l’obiettivo esplicito di favorire la collaborazione. Quindi la domanda che ogni studio dovrebbe farsi è: il modello di compensation è coerente con il tipo di partnership che si intende costruire nel tempo? In una fase in cui molti studi italiani ed europei stanno attraversando integrazioni e ridefinizioni strategiche e ricambi generazionali questa riflessione assume un peso concreto. 𝗜𝗹 𝗺𝗼𝗱𝗼 𝗶𝗻 𝗰𝘂𝗶 𝘀𝗶 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗯𝘂𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗼 𝗶 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶 𝘁𝗿𝗮 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗻𝗲𝗿 𝗻𝗼𝗻 𝗲̀ 𝗻𝗲𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗼: 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝘀𝘂𝗶 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗮𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶, 𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮 𝗹𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗮̀, 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗹𝘂𝗲𝗻𝘇𝗮 𝗹𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗰𝗵𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗲. Per questo il tema merita di essere affrontato con uno sguardo ampio, non solo tecnico. Il sistema di remunerazione non si limita a registrare l’esistente, ma contribuisce a modellare l’evoluzione dello studio e la qualità della sua partnership nel medio e lungo periodo. #marketude #partnership #partnerremuneration #partnercompensation

“I cannot allocate money to partners who innovate because there won’t be enough profit left to pay my rainmakers.” It sounds sensible. It is also misguided. In the age of AI, innovation has shifted from being a differentiator to being the minimum clients expect. They assume firms will deploy technology to improve speed, quality and cost. What was once experimental is now expected. When innovation becomes baseline, relying on unpaid partner effort becomes risky. Rapidly advancing AI capabilities means firms now need partners to redesign processes, train teams and embed new ways of working. Treating innovation as discretionary work sends a clear message about priorities. Does your firm reward innovation? Click the link in the comments to read the full article. #PartnerReward #PartnerCompensation #Innovation #AI

What to do if partners just don't want to develop business? In a delightful discussion on The Rainmaking Podcast recently, Scott Love and I peeled back the layers on how to use partner compensation to incentivize business development. For starters, partner compensation is only one part of the equation - the firm's culture around expectations, how partners advance and leadership maturity are hugely important. Unfortunately, many firms either oversimplify it e.g. through an "origination" formula that can't ever do justice to the nuance of personal relationships, or make it overly complex e.g. through pages of policy explaining how to allocate different types of credit. Scott and I discussed three starting points for how partner compensation encourages business development:  Three key points stood out from our discussion: 1. The right approach depends on firm size, strategic priorities and partnership culture. 2. Firms also need to recognize how partners contribute. One-size fits all originations rarely tell the full story. Some partners win new clients. Some expand key accounts. Some protect crown jewel relationships. All are valuable. 3. Compensation serves as a lever. It does not create action on its own. Leadership sets the tone, defines clear expectations and holds partners accountable. Listen to the podcast if you want to ensure your partner reward system supports strategy and drives growth: https://lnkd.in/et7TNdQF Enjoyed this insight? Sign up to receive regular briefings on partner reward straight to your inbox: #Leadership #ProfessionalServices #BusinessDevelopment #PartnerCompensation #FirmStrategy