'We Have to Act Courageously': A Conversation With Law Firm Chief Diversity Executives

Five chief diversity officers share their thoughts on diversity in the legal profession and comment on such issues as the diversity prop lawsuit and the effect a recession is likely to have on diversity in law firms.

August 07, 2019 at 06:16 PM

7 minute read

By Dylan Jackson

The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer

Law firms are increasingly putting chief diversity officers in their C-Suites, as the din of clients calling for their outside counsel to improve diversity among their ranks has grown.

The American Lawyer spoke to five law firm diversity executives—Fenimore Fisher of DLA Piper, Yusuf Zakir of Holland & Knight, Lloyd Freeman of Archer, Paulette Brown of Locke Lord and Kori Carew of Seyfarth Shaw—asking them about the current events and diversity-related trends they are seeing.

Their answers have been edited for length and clarity.

What makes a good chief diversity officer?

Brown: I will tell you that one of the reasons why I did not give up my partner status and my clients is because I believe you can be more effective when you contribute to the bottom line … I think that a chief diversity inclusion officer can be most effective when they have the ear of the head of the firm.

Carew: One thing that is essential is to have courage. There are a lot of things we haven’t done in the profession that we could have tried. There are ways in which we could have pushed harder. But we have a fear of failure, and we have a risk aversion that makes us want to prove with certainty that anything we do will work before we do it. It takes courage for a chief diversity officer to be able to put those things on the table in a way that is clear, direct and unapologetic and push for change and accountability.

Fisher: I think that in this role you have to be someone who applies a focus on tenacity, courage and strategic insight—aligning your strategy for diversity, equity and inclusion with the organization’s operational or business model. In order for you to be viewed with a sense of authenticity, you have to be viewed as somebody who is an advocate, even if it’s challenging at times. Lastly, you have to apply a sense of innovation to this work.

What is “diverse” to you? Is there a specific metric or number in mind?

Fisher: I think there’s a lot of generalization concerning parity with the general population, as opposed to a review and assessment of the readily available talent pool and future pipeline. What you always want to focus on is whether your hiring rates and ultimate placement rates are comparable to the rate in which people are applying for positions. I think you also want to focus on looking at the rates of whether women and diverse individuals that are being hired are being retained at comparable rates.

Zakir: There is no specific number or metric that we have in mind. We do aim to be reflective of society as a whole. We are a better institution and we can better serve our clients when we more accurately reflect the world around us. At the end of the day, lawyers solve problems, and those problems come in all different shapes and sizes; They’re experienced by people of all different backgrounds. So, what better way to provide the best counsel than to be able to see those problems from different angles.

Brown: I think that the end goal for me is to have a place where diverse people will want to come to work and where they will feel welcome and where diversity and inclusion is fully a part of the fabric and culture of the firm. Everybody looking from the outside into our firm will know that.

Did Michelle Fang’s call to action for diversity, signed by more than 200 general counsel, leave an impression on you? Did it change the way you approached diversity?