Moving Forward
Successful diversity programs start with an action-oriented committee.
September 30, 2009 at 08:00 PM
4 minute read
Over the course of the year, I have written about the critical need for legal departments across America to strive to reflect the diversity of the highest office in this land and to keep diversity at the forefront, even in the midst of economic downturn. As a profession, we must now evolve beyond articles continuously explaining the business case for diversity to persuade, convince and cajole law departments to do the right thing. At this stage, if ever we are to move diversity forward, we must take concrete action.
I ask three simple questions:
Does your legal department have a clearly defined policy on its commitment to diversity? Is your law department a signatory to General Mills' GC Rick Palmore's “Call to Action” statement or a participant in the newly launched Leadership Council on Legal Diversity? Does your legal department use diverse outside counsel to handle its legal matters? If you can't answer “yes” to these questions, then you need to solicit and engage law department members to participate on a diversity committee.
To be effective, the composition of the committee should include not only junior lawyers, but also senior legal executives who have the power to hire in-house lawyers and outside counsel. Even with this makeup, in no way should this committee be monolithic. Like the goal of the initiative, it too should be diverse, involving lawyers of different shades, backgrounds and beliefs.
This committee must be action oriented and have the recognized authority to develop and implement approaches and strategies to drive results. The committee's key role will ensure compliance with measurable goals and objectives.
A diversity committee's initial task is to create a diversity mission statement, which communicates the law department's commitment to diversity among the workforce and inside and outside counsel. But a glowing mission statement on paper alone will not move diversity forward. What will move it is a viable diversity committee to oversee its implementation.
After putting these action steps in place, the legal department must create methods for measuring progress and assuring accountability. These can include tools, surveys and benchmarks to assess the true performance of the department.
For example, if the law department has a goal to increase diversity of the outside counsel handling its legal matters, on a quarterly basis the committee (or subcommittee) can review the billable hours of each law firm to ascertain how many diverse lawyers were actually assigned to work on the legal matters and what kind of tasks they performed (photocopying versus motion paper preparation). When counsel know exactly what you expect and how you are measuring it, those involved tend to take the diversity program seriously.
The next steps involve providing feedback to the company on its performance. The diversity committee's role does not stop once it creates a mission statement or distributes surveys. Its importance continues in implementing diversity incentives to acknowledge, recognize and reward those who are carrying out the company's mission. These incentives serve as encouragement to others and send the message that the company is indeed serious about diversity.
Moving diversity forward requires ongoing leadership on the part of in-house attorneys, outside counsel and senior management. Putting diversity on the table and getting multiple people to participate in the process, in the end, will get the profession to moving in the direction of being inclusive. An inclusive working environment creates a win-win solution for the workforce, the company and its clients.
Laurie N. Robinson is vice president and assistant general counsel at CBS Corp. and Founder and CEO of Corporate Counsel Women of Color.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readLegal Departments Gripe About Outside Counsel but Rarely Talk to Them
4 minute readGC With Deep GM Experience Takes Legal Reins of Power Management Giant
2 minute readPreparing for 2025: Anticipated Policy Changes Affecting U.S. Businesses Under the Trump Administration
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250