The Promotion Process at Chung and Dasgupta

The Promotion Process at Chung and Dasgupta
Background:
A patent is legal protection for an invention. It gives a patent owner 20 years to have monopoly over the
invention. He can sue those that copy or “infringe” on a patent. In return, the inventor must publish his
work, thus adding to publicly available scientific knowledge that is the basis for future inventions. After
20 years from filing, the patent expires and the general public can enjoy the benefits of the invention
without needing to make premium payments to the original inventor. However, most big patent firms
are able to extend the “patent life” of the invention by patenting other aspects of the invention that
have not yet been made public. This can keep patents protected for quite a long time unless disputed in
courts.
Brief Summary:
Chung and Dasgupta, LLP (C&D) is a law firm that focuses on complex patent litigation cases. Due to the
very complex process of a patent litigation case, C&D have 2 lawyers tracks: a “Team Leader Track” and
a “Litigation Track”.
- The team leader is the “process manager” that guides the case through the entire litigation
process. The team leader’s work is more “admin” in nature.
- The “Litigation” track is the group of lawyers that actually argue the case before the courts.
C&D assess lawyers from the 2 tracks uniformly using the same assessment criteria, grading system and
through the use of an assigned “Development Coach” who assesses these lawyers from the day they
start to the day they are considered for partnership.
- Jordan Remirez is a Team Leader who is well-regarded and has a strong track-record of winning
cases for the firm.
- Mona Leung is a superstar litigator who is being pirated to join a litigation firm.
Both of them have only been associates for 7 years but will be discussed during “Assessment Weekend”
to see if they should be promoted to partner 2 years earlier than the typical partner promotion date.
Case Details:
Chung and Dasgupa LLP (C&D), is a leading patent litigation firm based in Cambrdige, MA in the USA. I
was founded by Tian-Cho-Chung, a Chinese immigrant who completed his PhD in astrophysics at MIT and
Anjali Dasgupta, an Indian immigrant who completed his PhD in engineering from Duke.
They decided to pursue law school after painful experiences in defending their scientific work from
patent infringement by large and powerful companies, which succeeded in “stealing” their scientific
work because these companies had good patent lawyers. C&D immediately became profitable within
the first year and focused on plaintiffs/claimants (1) whose work was being infringed (rather than
defending an infringer). They also focused on cases that have (2) a likelihood of going to trial (75% of
patent litigation cases are settled).
This study source was downloaded by 100000858128203 from CourseHero.com on 11-08-2023 12:37:19 GMT -06:00
https://www.coursehero.com/file/213471391/The-Promotion-Process-at-Chung-and-Dasguptadocx/
The Litigation Process
A regular lawsuit is complex, but a patent litigation case is even more so given the subject-matter expert
requirements to prepare for a case.
The following are the typical stages of litigation:
 Case assessment: lawyer reviews documents and collaborates with clients to see if case is worth
pursuing
 **** Pre-trial pleadings and motions: documents filed in court to state the client’s basic position
 Discovery: both parties requests documents from each other and ask certain facts to be
admitted so that both parties are on the same page regarding the facts
 Trial preparation: preparation of a trial brief which will summarize and collect all pertinent facts
related to the case, develop a trial strategy typically in collaboration with a senior associate and
to be reviewed by a partner. If witnesses will be presented, direct examination and cross-
examination “scripts” will be prepared in advance and witnesses may be briefed about these
questions as well if the witness is on the same side as the lawyer
 **** Actual Trial: case is presented to a judge or jury
 Appeal: if case is lost, the same process again happens but now in a higher (appeals) court
C & D Litigation Career Model
C&D have two lawyer tracks, a “non-litigation” track called “Team Leader” and a “Litigation” track. A
Team Leader is focused on project/process management, and was expected to give C&D a competitive
advantage to have a lawyer do the “admin work” to shepherd the case from start to finish given the
complexity of patent litigation. The other track is the “Litigation” track which does actual “lawyer work”,
arguing the case in the court room. C&D did this as well, with Chung starting out as the Team Leader in
the beginning and Dasgupta litigating the case before the courts. Lawyers cannot switch tracks.
At C&D, both the Team Leader and the Litigation lawyers were equally valued, with the team leader
being more valued by C&D because he/she understood all aspects of the case from start to finish.
Performance Assessment
At C&D, each Associate is assigned a “Development Coach” who guides the associate from his/her first
year to the time the associate becomes partner (after 9-11 years) or leaves the firm.
C&D does not have a competency assessment questionnaire. They use the following broad criteria and
leave it to the Development Coach to perform the assessment details:
 Productivity
 Work efficiency
 Analytic ability
 Writing ability
 Leadership
 Initiative
 Independence
 Judgment and Maturity
 Teamwork and Firm Relationships
 Client Relationships
Scoring is based on the following grading system:
A. Meets partner-level expectations

B. Exceeds the average Associate but falls short of partner expectations
C. Average Associate; meets Associate expectations
D. Below average Associate but acceptable performance
E. Not acceptable performance
These A-E scores are turned into a “Grade Point Average” similar to a university from 1.0 to 4.0 (latter
being highest).
Unlike most law firms, C&D does not heavily rely on “billable hours” since lawyers may be motivated to
simply “chase hours” without actually being productive. Billable hours are also considered but they are
under only 2 criteria – productivity and efficiency. Associates are also asked to do a self-assessment.
Sometime every January or February, all partners of C&D attend a trip called “Assessment Weekend” to
force rank all associates by years of experience (position level). Nothing in the process differentiates
“Team Leaders” and “Litigators”.
Late February, the Development Coach provides feedback to the Associate through a Performance
Assessment Meeting and about development priorities for the coming year.
The results of the performance assessment determines the bonus that an associate will get ranging from
60% (bottom quartile) to 140% (top 10%). However, when the bonuses are finally calculated, the actual
monetary difference is only 18%.
Promotion to Partner
The long-term goal of lawyers in performing well is not really to get a huge bonus at the end of the year
but to become a partner since that’s where profit-sharing and therefore, big money, comes in.
During Assessment Weekend, lawyers that are up for promotion are discussed. Those lawyers that have
(1) ranked in the bottom 25% three years in a row or lawyers;
(2) not ranked in the top 50% four years in a row; or
(3) who have stayed more than 11 years without making partner,
will be told that they will not likely ever be considered for partnership. This will result in a “voluntary
departure” by a lawyer since the goal of most lawyers is to make it to partner.
Mona Leung: Superstar Litigator
Mona Leung is a 7-year associate who is being considered for partnership because of her topnotch
litigation skills. She has also has an impeccable background – a Master’s in Chemical Engineering from
MIT and a JD from Yale Law School. She clerked for a Supreme Court justice and a United States Court of
Appeals Federal Circuit, both for patent cases.
Despite being only an associate, she is usually asked to represent high-profile cases usually requiring a
senior partner. She is being pirated by competitor companies to become a partner. C&D has never
promoted a partner with less than 9 years of experience. Mona Leung may be the very first.
Her grading is almost straight A’s except for “Teamwork”. She has been consistently in the top 10 from
her 2nd-7th year.
Jordan Ramirez
Jordan Ramirez is a Team Leader and also a 7-year associate. She also has a great background:
Engineering Physics from CalTech and a JD from Yale. Jordan’s progress has been typical but she is well-
regarded by everyone and has a great track-record, winning 85% of her cases.
She will be represented in the “Assessment Weekend” by a new Development Coach, Casey Clark,
because her former Development Coach resigned from poor health.
Casey Clark now needs to prepare for Assessment Weekend and will schedule her Performance
Assessment Meeting with Jordan.
Jordan on the other hand also has straight A’s but she has consistently gotten a “C” in productivity
(billable hours). On her 6th year, she got an “A” in judgment but this turned into a “B” on the 7 th year
because her productivity has never improved.
QUESTIONS:
1. Assess the strengths and weaknesses of the performance evaluation process at Chung
and Dasgupta. Thinking as both a partner and an associate, what do you think is most
critical in ensuring the process succeeds?
The quality of the assessment will largely depends on the capability of the Development
Coach to fairly assess the lawyers since the criteria are broad and they don’t have a
specific questionnaire or checklist unlike the competency assessments of other top law
firms like Baker & McKenzie and Clyde & Co. There is a possibility that the assessment
will be questioned if the Development Coach and the lawyer are not in good terms.
2. If you were a partner at C & D, would you support the early election of Mona Leung to
partner? Why or why not? What is the downside to your position (to promote her or
not), and how would you handle these risks?
I will not promote Mona but will wait for the 9th year mainly because the decision to
promote her affects the expectations of the other lawyers of the firm. However, I would
re-consider the bonus given to her at the end of the year and give her a “hall of fame”
bonus of something like 160%-200% bonus.
Advantages of early promotion:

 Motivates others lawyers to become superstars so they can be promoted within
7 years
 Avoid Mona Leung being pirated by a competitor law firm
 Demonstrate fairness since Mona Leung is performing senior partner level work
already and her compensation should reflect her performance
Disadvantages of early promotion:

 Lawyers will now expect that it is possible to be promoted within 7 years and
some may feel that they are “superstar enough” to be promoted. If they are not
promoted, they may resign
 Team leaders (such as Jordan) may think that they are discriminated which will
lead to a ripple of talent turnover among team leaders
 Team Leaders may think that the management does not understand the work of
a team leader that it is not about the number of hours but the quality of hours in
efficiently managing processes. Team leaders such as Jordan seem to be
punished for being extremely efficient despite delivering great results.
3. We will start class with a role play of the Performance Assessment Meeting between
Casey Clark and Jordan Ramirez. You will receive additional information on your assigned
role prior to the role play, with enough time to prepare. Please read this confidential role
information carefully and come to class prepared to do a role play with another
participant, who will be assigned the other role.
เตรียม Debate ในมุมแต่ละคน – พิจารณาว่าจุดด้อยของแต่ละคน Effect กับผลงานจริง ๆ

แค่ไหน และ Trade off ได้ไหม
[I don’t have a copy of the confidential role information. Just pretend you are giving feedback to your
subordinate or getting feedback from your boss. As Casey, in my view, I would ask why Jordan’s
productivity has been consistently low. If this is because she is extremely efficient, I will ask the
partners to reconsider her score since “admin work” benefits from extreme efficiency. I will ask
though why Jordan has not asked the Development Coach to raise this issue with the partners (so
still poor judgement/assertiveness on her part). As Jordan, similarly, I will defend my productivity to
the fact that the nature of the work of “litigation” and “admin” work are different and while
“litigation work” creates benefits from long hours of study, “admin work” benefits from extreme
process efficiency.]
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

The Promotion Process at Chung and Dasgupta

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Promotion Process at Chung and Dasgupta

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Promotion Process at Chung and Dasgupta

The following are the typical stages of litigation:

C & D Litigation Career Model

Scoring is based on the following grading system:

A. Meets partner-level expectations

(1) ranked in the bottom 25% three years in a row or lawyers;

(2) not ranked in the top 50% four years in a row; or

Mona Leung: Superstar Litigator

Advantages of early promotion:

Disadvantages of early promotion:

เตรียม Debate ในมุมแต่ละคน – พิจารณาว่าจุดด้อยของแต่ละคน Effect กับผลงานจริง ๆ

You might also like