|
|
|
 |  |
 |
 |
WSBA Info | |
|
For Lawyers | |
|
For the Public |  |
 |
For the Media |  |
|
CLE |  |
| | Bench Bar Guidelines | News Releases | Publications | |
|
|
June 2009Washington’s 2008–2009 Law Firm Diversity Report and What It Meansby Thuy Nguyen-Leeper What are law firms in Washington state doing to support diversity? The Washington State Minority Bar Associations wanted to know. In 2008 and 2009, the Minority Bar Associations of Washington (MBA) Joint Committee on Law Firm Diversity surveyed Washington’s largest private law firms to measure both successes and gaps relating to diversity practices inside the firms. The results, published in March 2009, reveal that firms are working to increase and maintain diversity, but significant challenges remain. The Law Firm Diversity Report was created and executed by nine of the MBA groups: Asian Bar Association of Washington, Korean American Bar Association of Washington, Latina/o Bar Association of Washington, Loren Miller Bar Association, Northwest Indian Bar Association, QLaw (the GLBT Bar Association of Washington), South Asian Bar Association of Washington, Vietnamese American Bar Association of Washington, and Washington Women Lawyers. The report was completed in consultation with the Washington Attorneys with Disabilities Association. A copy of the report can be found at www.vabaw.com/documents/final%20report.pdf. The Goals in Creating the Law Firm Diversity Report The goals of the report included identifying firms that support overall diversity efforts, and providing examples of those successes; helping firms understand the power of diversity in an organization, both for business gain and for social progress; and providing law students with information that could help them choose firms that will support their needs during professional development. The MBA groups also hope that in-house counsel will consider the report when hiring attorneys as outside counsel, thereby acknowledging that lateral diversity hiring confers a business advantage, and creates positive social change in all professional environments. In May 2008, the Committee sent a questionnaire to the 50 largest law firms in Washington state. The questionnaire sought detailed demographic information regarding the racial/ethnic, gender, sexual orientation, and disability status of attorneys and summer associates in the law firm. The questionnaire also asked for descriptions of law firm diversity efforts and programs. The responses were analyzed and the firms were scored and ranked. Out of the 50 law firms invited to participate, 32 responded. The data was organized into two categories: hard factors, meaning demographics, and soft factors, meaning narrative information about diversity efforts and programs within the firm. Both categories were used to determine a firm’s composite score regarding diversity efforts. For the overall rankings, the Committee gave more weight to hard factors, meaning that the actual numbers of diverse attorneys in the firm constituted an objective measure of success for that firm. However, the Committee also gave substantial consideration to the soft factors, acknowledging that diversity outreach efforts and programs that support and welcome diversity in a firm should be considered in the overall scoring. The Committee strove to assess firms in a fair and neutral manner, giving weight to each effort undertaken by the firm. For example, the Committee recognized that, depending on size, practice area, or geographic isolation, some firms face unique challenges in creating a diverse work force. Every firm is different, but each can support and welcome its diverse attorneys, no matter how few the number. This report is a blueprint for starting or strengthening that process. The MBA commend the 32 law firms that participated in the survey, particularly those who understood that their diversity numbers or efforts might be eclipsed by other firms. In contrast, the MBA were very disappointed that some firms did not respond to the survey, or chose not to participate. The firms that received the highest overall scores, in order, based on the above criteria are: Perkins Coie, Heller Ehrman, Helsell Fetterman, Cairncross & Hempelmann, Davis Wright Tremaine, K&L Gates, Graham & Dunn, Stoel Rives, Dorsey & Whitney, and Bullivant Houser Bailey. These top-ranking firms had several things in common. They had strong, established incentives and execution in the following areas: recruitment and hiring; mentoring; retention; promotions and management; and policies and programs. Examples of law firm successes include Perkins Coie’s program for lateral diverse hiring, a regular retreat/meeting for attorneys of color, and repeated and sustained sponsorship of minority bar activities, including MBA dinners and events. Heller Ehrman (now dissolved) stood out for strong advertising of open attorney positions through the minority bar associations, the use of executive search firms, and a career-development credit toward billable-hour expectations for new hires. Helsell Fetterman strongly supports same-sex partnerships and shows it by providing extensive domestic-partner benefits, by equalizing the disparate tax burden for same-sex partnerships, and by providing pro bono representation for same-sex plaintiffs. Cairncross & Hempelmann strongly sponsors diversity events and strongly supports MBA membership for practicing attorneys. Davis Wright Tremaine instituted a pilot mentoring program which partners diverse attorneys with significant clients to enhance attorney-client development; further, the firm instituted a partnership coaching program which offers intense mentorship for diverse attorneys under consideration for promotion. K&L Gates reflected success by regularly reviewing work assignments to ensure that diverse attorneys are not being excluded. Graham & Dunn makes sure to introduce diverse attorneys to key clients. Stoel Rives offers diversity scholarships for first-year law students, with offers for those students to return their second summer. Dorsey & Whitney also sponsors scholarships and the firm matches diverse new attorneys with diverse attorney mentors in the firm. Bullivant Houser Bailey hired a diversity specialist and holds an annual meeting for diverse attorneys with feedback to the Board of Directors. Other firms support diversity with dedicated budgets for diversity activities. Some firms have dedicated diversity professionals who report directly to managing partners. The findings also reveal that firms demonstrating strong performance in one key area may fall short in another area. For example, the firm with the highest percentage of racial and ethnic minority attorneys (33 percent minority attorneys, or 13 of 39 attorneys) ranked lowest in recruitment and retention and in the bottom three for same-sex partner programs. A firm in the top three for percentage of minority, female, GLBT, and disabled attorneys in firm leadership ranked last for percentage of racial and ethnic minorities. Some firms with a high percentage of hiring in one minority sector have low percentages of overall minority hiring. For example, the firm with the highest percentage of female attorneys (73 percent female attorneys, or 16 of 22 attorneys) had the lowest percentage of racial and ethnic minority attorneys but ranked the highest percentage for combined minority, female, GLBT, and disabled summer law clerks. What would a firm look like if it fully committed to supporting diversity? The report answers that question, in part. Firms fully supporting diversity would emulate the successes mentioned above. They would generate ideas to support diverse attorneys and the minority community. They would engage in regular strategic thinking, and they would create and execute a plan of action. This report is the MBA’s way of raising awareness about the current status of diversity in the 50 largest law firms in this state, to inspire dialogue, strategic thinking, and focused, strong initiatives to support a broad scope of diversity efforts. The Washington MBA urge further research, discussion, and proactive execution of initiatives to support policies and programs at all levels for diverse attorneys, from recruitment to hiring, mentoring to retention and promotions, to firm management and leadership. For more detail, including statistical data, please contact the Minority Bar Associations, www.wsba.org/lawyers/links/minoritybarassoc.htm, or contact attorney Thuy Nguyen-Leeper, co-chair of the Minority Bar Associations of Washington Joint Committee on Law Firm Diversity, at thuy.nguyenleeper@expeditors.com. Thuy Nguyen-Leeper is assistant corporate counsel at Expeditors International of Washington, Inc., where she focuses on commercial transactions. She was formerly an associate at Dorsey & Whitney LLP, where her practice was commercial, securities, and antitrust litigation. Attorney Wilberforce Agyekum and Assistant Attorney General Maureen Mannix edit this column.
June 12, 2009: Minority Bar Coalition Statewide Diversity Conference, Seattle University School of Law Asian Bar Association of Washington — www.abaw.org June 6, 2009: Latin America Beisbol Day, Edgar Martinez Scholarship Foundation, Safeco Field. To purchase tickets, please contact Fé Lopez at fe.f.lopez@lbaw.org. June 10, July 8, and August 12, 2009: LBAW-SGB Legal Clinic, 6–8 p.m., El Centro de la Raza, Seattle. Contact Fé Lopez or Lorena Gonzalez to volunteer at clinics@lbaw.org. Loren Miller Bar Association — www.lmba.net September 4–5, 2009: 21st Annual UW Indian Law Symposium. Call 206-543-0059 or e-mail uwcle@u.washington.edc. Pierce County Minority Bar Association — www.orgsites.com/wa/pcmba |
