Yes, It Is Hard to Think About Diversity....God Help Us!

(thanks to fistofblog.com)

"I did not study at Oxford and the LSE to end up working with people who graduated from Leicester or Queen Mary," wrote one person on legalweek.com in response to the news last week that magic circle outfit Freshfields is extending the number of universities from which it recruits.

This is one of the comments that attached itself to the Legal Week story on how law firms are increasing their diversity by recruiting from some extra universities. I wrote about this last week.

Alex Aldridge in the Guardian takes it a bit further:

But there's a growing sense that the legal profession – which is notorious for lagging behind other walks of life in reflecting the public mood – is casting aside some of these prejudices.

But as I said before "casting aside" isn't really about increasing diversity in the talent pool, it's about trying to find a few more recruits who are nearly like us from universities that are like Oxbridge. Perhaps Alex's closing statement says it all, and it's a depressing all.

A senior partner at a large law firm told me recently that he thought recruitment based purely on academic merit had gone too far, advocating instead a return to the old system of hiring "five brainboxes, five wild cards, five solid all-rounders who were good at sport (for the firm's cricket and rugby teams) and five stunningly beautiful women".

He added that one of the main reasons his firm stuck to the top universities was the students themselves: "They're the biggest snobs of all. If we recruit too widely, they won't come to us."

Screaming and kicking into the 21st century might be the norm here.

And let's add in an arrival from the Lawyer that Slaughter and May managed to promote 5 associates without a woman among them. Marjorie in the comments says it all:

So, not a single woman gets promoted. And not a single woman was promoted last year. And two female partners have just left. What does this do to their diversity stats??

Yes, It Is Hard to Think About Diversity....God Help Us!

Is It Really So Hard to Think About Diversity?

(thanks to gallery.rhino3d.com)

Here we are in the 21st century and the big law firms have announced they are taking on board diversity. Three cheers you might say.

In addition to Oxbridge they will now recruit from universities such as Queen's Belfast, Leicester, Queen Mary London, Cardiff, and Sussex. These are all well-known for being lower-caste universities and probably haven't had much success in getting their graduates hired in law.

This is what Legal Week tells us in its story, "Top UK law firms to target more universities in diversity push". It's good to know diversity is firmly on the agenda and that middle-class, white kids who didn't quite make it into Oxbridge will sleep better now.

Now this is why diversity is one of the regulatory objectives for the modern legal profession. If you want to know more about the subject, read my colleagues evidence-based research for the Legal Services Board.

It makes you want to weep......

Is It Really So Hard to Think About Diversity?

Research Does Have Impact

(thanks to Northern Arizona University)

The Legal Services Board has today published a paper published a consultation paper on its diversity priorities. The paper sets out its case thus:

This paper discusses our policy proposals in relation to increasing diversity and social mobility at all levels of the legal services workforce. It focuses on the role of providers (firms and chambers) and approved regulators in this process, and does not  directly address the separate but related issues of:

ensuring access to legal services for diverse groups of consumers the potential for reforms to the existing framework for legal education and training, which could create additional opportunities to open a career in legal services to the widest possible pool of talent.

What I find cheering about this is that it is based on the recommendations made by my colleagues' recent research on diversity. It's great to see a regulator taking care to make evidence-based decisions.

The consultation is open to 9 March 2011 and all responses are welcomed.

Research Does Have Impact

Difference Between Men and Women

(thanks to susonna)

Following our workshop on diversity recently, I've been introduced to interesting research on women and medicine which has tremendous utility for law.

Paul Coombes and Helena Cronin were members of the oversight steering group for the Royal College of Physicians on its project on the future of women in medicine. The project analyzed data from NHS workforce statistics as well as various forms of entry statistics. The full report is available here.

In a short summary article Paul Coombes drew out some the significant findings. Rather like law, the numbers of women entering now form the majority of entrants and by 2017 women will constitute the majority of the medical profession. Yet there are dramatic differences in the selection of specialties by men and women which can be explained by work characteristics and patterns.

Coombes notes

Two areas of systematic difference stand out from the latest research:
1. Women doctors’ comparative preference, on average, for working in specialties that offer a relatively greater amount of patient interaction and/or more ‘plan-able’ working hours.
2. The far greater preference of women doctors, compared with men, for part-time or other forms of flexible working.

For example, as the internal characteristics of the specialties change so does their attractiveness to women. Hence, as anaesthetics has become more shift-based and less open-ended with more predictable working patterns, there has been a rise in women trainees.


The differences are also found across other health systems and is not merely a function of the NHS funding model.

It is now possible to predict how women's working practices are formed and will change. It will be interesting to see how analogous predictions play out in the legal profession.

Difference Between Men and Women

Will There Be Diversity in the Legal Profession?

The Westminster-Legal Services Board workshop on diversity was a great success. Around 100 people attended the presentation of the new research commissioned by the Legal Services Board. The workshop was organized by the Law School's Centre for the Legal Profession and Legal Services. You can download the full report and summary from here.

Researchers Liz Duff and Lisa Webley from Westminster, Daniel Muzio and Jennifer Tomlinson from Leeds, Hilary Sommerlad from Leicester, and Anna Zimdars from Manchester presented in-depth, qualitative research that illustrated people's feelings about discrimination and diversity in the legal profession. It wasn't too depressing as Chris Kenny, CEO of the LSB, showed that trends were improving--it's just that we need to know more why the profession hasn't fully come to terms with the problems.

The presentation was followed by a discussion panel composed of David Pittaway QC of the Bar Council, Stephen Ward of the Law Society, Crispin Passmore of the LSB, and Andy Boon of the Law School.

Neil Rose reported on the research and conference at Legal Futures. He noted:

Launching the London conference, LSB chief executive Chris Kenny said diversity was a key LSB objective. “We believe passionately that unless you’ve got a diverse profession, a profession that looks like the society which it serves, actually you probably won’t have a fully effective profession either.”

Crispin Passmore, strategy director for the LSB, also wrote in the Guardian:

The LSB is working to increase transparency about the makeup of the legal workforce. We're considering requiring law firms and chambers to publish and report the findings of regular surveys of their workforces in order to shine a light on the diversity of the profession. Some law businesses will already reflect their local community. Others will rightly take credit for improving diversity.

 It's clear more work needs to be done in this area.

Will There Be Diversity in the Legal Profession?

Diversity Workshop at Westminster on October 13

 

(Thanks to New Yorker)

I am sure we won't have this problem on Wednesday at the Diversity Workshop. Find the details here. You are all welcome.

Diversity Workshop at Westminster on October 13

Diversity Workshop at Westminster 13 October--You Are Invited

(Thanks to Richard Thomson in Guardian from Notting Hill Carnival 2010)

A while back I wrote about my colleagues' research project on diversity in the legal profession for the Legal Services Board (LSB). At last that research is completed. A multi-faceted team from the Universities of Westminster, Leeds, and Leicester have submitted their report to the LSB.

We, at Westminster, are holding a seminar/workshop for the launch of the report. Here's a brief clip of what to expect:

The seminar is being held to launch a new research report commissioned by the Legal Services Board on diversity in the legal profession. There have been dramatic changes in the legal profession in the last 20 years. In 2008-09 women made up 46% of practising solicitors and 60% of entrants to the profession. For the Bar the figures were 34% (women barristers) and 50% (women entrants). In the case of black and minority ethnic lawyers there has been a 244% increase in their numbers in the ten years between 1996 and 2006. Despite these increases the legal profession is still dominated by white males. There is a greater division with white lawyers being over-represented in City law firms and at the Bar, while BME lawyers are found in greater numbers in smaller High Street law firms.

The research examines the causes for these differences, their persistence and what strategies are available to change cultures and expectations. Despite the implementation of procedures meant to neutralize discrimination, they are easily bypassed. Interviewers raise inappropriate questions about ethnicity, gender, and background. For those in the profession work was allocated unfairly and to question this was deprecated.

The biggest obstacle was the culture of informality that made it difficult for people to raise problems or question established ways of working. Moreover, racial stereotyping was pervasive.

Even though many law firms are trying hard to counter these inequities, the majority still abide by them.

(thanks to idsgn.org)

On October 13 the University of Westminster and the Legal Services Board are hosting a workshop/seminar to launch the report and discuss it.

The research team--Liz Duff (Westminster), Daniel Muzio (Leeds), Hilary Sommerlad (Leicester), Jenny Tomlinson (Leeds), Lisa Webley (Westminster), along with Anna Zimdars (Manchester)--will present their findings.

This will be followed by a panel discussion and questions with David Pittaway QC (Bar Council), Pat Corcoran and Stephen Ward (Law Society), Crispin Passmore (Legal Services Board) and Andy Boon (Westminster). I will be moderating.

It should be a lively and intriguing time. You are all invited.

DATE: October 13
TIME: 1500--1800
PLACE: Fyvie Hall, University of Westminster, 309 Regent St, London W1B 2UW (Streetmap link)

(thanks to chrisjfry)

Diversity Workshop at Westminster 13 October--You Are Invited

Diversity in the Legal Profession?

(Thanks to Karishma Daswani)

Neil Rose at Legal Futures reports that the Legal Services Board (LSB) is to compel law firms and barristers' chambers to disclose information on diversity, which would encompass:

• age
• disability
• gender
• race
• religion or belief
• sexual orientation
• working patterns
• social mobility

This should come into effect in February 2011. And not before time.

My colleagues Lisa Webley and Liz Duff have been doing research on this, in conjunction with scholars from Leeds, for the LSB. Their report is due shortly and at Westminster we will be holding a seminar on this on 13 October. My guess is that their findings will not make happy reading for the profession.


This is an aspect of the legal profession which has remained under-researched and misunderstood for a long time. Both solicitors and the Bar have been reluctant to provide figures, except in aggregate, on gender and ethnicity. We do know that there are severe distortions in numbers between entry to law school and those in practice.

Lawyers and the legal profession have been good at portraying themselves as meritocratic and having removed the last traces of noblesse oblige. Yet without the statistics how do we know?

Discussion groups on Linked In have been grumbling about "heavy-handed" regulation from the LSB over having to collect and disclose this information. But they have only themselves to blame for not taking the lead and actively seeking to resolve the problems endemic in the profession.

Unfortunately when it comes to change the legal profession is snail-like. And this is one of the reasons the Legal Services Board exists--to overcome the inertia of the profession. Maybe it will begin to get the message, if it's prepared to listen. But....

Diversity in the Legal Profession?