What If Only Women Were on a Laterals Shortlist? It's Already Happening
Recruiters have been told to deliver lists with only women. In other cases, they've been told to come up with a shortlist that's 30 percent female.
March 22, 2019 at 05:30 AM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The push to improve numbers of women lawyers across attorney tiers has pressured firms to decide on the best strategy for diversity — be it fast, aggressive hiring or slow, organic growth.
One trend that has emerged amid the heightened push for diversity is firms requiring recruiters to include women — and sometimes only women — on shortlists of lateral partner candidates. But that isn't always viewed as a good thing.
According to a recent report by legal recruiting company Fox Rodney Search, women made up 27 percent of all partner moves in 2018 in London compared with 25 percent in 2017. Broken down, women made up 27 percent of lateral hires last year and 28 percent of all partner promotions.
Recruiters say they've had at least one law firm ask for an exclusively female list. One recruiter said a major law firm specifically said they wanted to hire a female corporate partner.
However, exclusively female short lists have been widely criticized, said by some to be dabbling in discrimination, arguably hiring women for the sake of hiring women. Although a quick solution to female partnership numbers, this strategy has been labeled “extreme” by some recruiters and partners.
One employment partner at a Magic Circle firm said, “Unless you can truly justify it for a specific cause or role, that just seems somewhat inappropriate, period.”
However, more reserved recruitment approaches are common and often encouraged as a strategy for getting more women into senior roles.
Recruiters say many law firms have asked them to help increase their female partner count by seeking to put a focus on looking for female talent, or in some cases giving recruiters a quota for the number of women on short lists.
And as a result of this demand, one recruiter said: “I now represent more female partners than I ever have in my career.”
MLegal partner Melinda Wallman and Fox Rodney partner Siobhan Lewington said recruiters are used to ensuring a balance for law firms during lateral hires and partner promotion rounds.
“Though we have seen some great stats recently in terms of percentage of women promoted to partner, those additions are often canceled out when 1) female partners leave and 2) male partners are hired,” Wallman said.
Lewington added, “Law firms are very focused right now on ensuring more female partners are mentored and supported through to partnership. It's also important that firms' lateral hiring activities don't further dilute the gender composition of the partnership. The strategy needs to be twofold.”
Multiple recruiters said that one approach law firms use is to request that a certain number of women are included on recruitment short lists. Melton Legal Search managing partner Vassos Georgiadis said they are often required to provide data on their female recruitment.
“Many firms often prefer to use agents with a strong track record of delivering female candidates. … If a headhunting firm has not been responsible for many female partner placements, it is now to their detriment,” Georgiadis said.
Melton Legal Search senior consultant Tom Moore said law firms often want a 30 percent female short list, which is most firms' target for the percentage of female partners, including firms that have adopted the Mansfield Rule.
According to Fox Rodney Search's report, women are best represented in the employment, IP, and banking and finance practice areas and worst represented in private equity, energy, infrastructure and projects and corporate.
Comparing female lateral hiring with organic growth, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer corporate partner Natasha Good said that while hiring female partners offers a quick, short-term solution, it does not go to the the “heart” of the issue.
“It feels a bit like moving a piece around a chess set instead of actually dealing with the long-term problem,” Good said.
One employment partner at a top U.S. firm, who asked not to be named, said the lateral hiring numbers are strained because there is less willingness by women to change firms because there is a greater feeling of appreciation from women when they get to partner.
He said that although the firm has told headhunters when it's particularly open to female partners, lateral hires are not the solution to gender inequality in partnership; organic growth is. “Organic growth is however slow, so we're alert to not making the challenge greater by hiring an excessive number of male partners,” the partner added.
Some major female lateral hires since the start of 2018 include Dechert's hire of U.S. rival Sidley Austin's global litigation co-head Dorothy Cory-Wright, Kirkland & Ellis's hire of Allen & Overy global intellectual property head Nicola Dagg, and Paul Hastings' hire of private equity partner Anu Balasubramanian.
Since the start of this year, Pinsent Masons' has hired planning partner Lucy Thomas from Ashurst; DLA Piper has recruited real estate partner Susan Samuel from Eversheds Sutherland, finance partner Rebecca Williams from Addleshaw Goddard, and real estate partner Lorraine Reader from DWF; and CMS has hired real estate partner Abigail Dry from DWF.
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 AllNorth Carolina Courts Switch to Digital, Face Extreme Weather in 2024
'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute read'So Many Firms' Have Yet to Announce Associate Bonuses, Underlining Big Law's Uneven Approach
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Data Breach Lawsuit Against Byte Federal Among 1,500 Targeting Companies in 2024
- 2Counterfeiters Ride Surge in Tabletop Games’ Popularity, Challenging IP Owners to Keep Up
- 3Health Care Data Breach Class Actions Saw December Surge in NY Courts
- 4Florida Supreme Court Disbars 3, Suspends 11, Reprimands 1 in Final Disciplinary Order of 2024
- 5Chief Justice Roberts Ends Year With Defense Against 'Illegitimate' Attacks on Judiciary
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