{"id":49203,"date":"2016-06-28t05:01:57","date_gmt":"2016-06-28t09:01:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/48e130086c.nxcli.net\/?p=49203"},"modified":"2024-08-14t11:27:58","modified_gmt":"2024-08-14t15:27:58","slug":"mps-how-to-elect-them-and-fire-them","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"\/\/www.g005e.com\/2016\/06\/28\/mps-how-to-elect-them-and-fire-them\/","title":{"rendered":"managing partners: how to elect them… and fire them"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"midsection<\/a>and why a five-year term is ideal.
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n

by <\/i>bill reeb<\/i><\/a> and <\/i>dominic cingoranelli<\/i><\/a><\/p>\n

often, firms elect a managing partner with a majority vote, but to dismiss a managing partner within their elected term requires a higher vote, commonly two-thirds of the equity vote. in some larger firms, the people running for managing partner might not be eligible to vote in this process, but in many others, everyone can vote.<\/p>\n

more on performance management:<\/b> the job of managing partner: empowered or emasculated?<\/a> | how the best managing partners turn ideas into reality<\/a> | make accountability a process<\/a> | accountability requires clear expectations<\/a> | base retirement on today\u2019s operations<\/a> | how involved should retired owners be?<\/a> | how to find a partner\u2019s replacement<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

the reason why everyone should be allowed to vote is simply that the smaller the firm, the more likely that removing the candidates being considered for the position puts too much control in the minority ownership of the firm. for example, consider the following six-partner firm scenario:
\n read more →<\/a><\/p>\n