Diversity guru tells law firms to focus on promoting inclusion
Recruiting a diverse workforce is easy but top City law firms are falling down when it comes to creating an inclusive atmosphere where lawyers from all backgrounds want to stay and build their careers.Leading diversity consultant Linbert Spencer told delegates at a Shilton Sharpe Quarry (SSQ) forum last week, that inclusion is one of the hardest issues facing law firms today - rather than the initial recruitment of minority workers.Spencer applauded the efforts already being made to encourage diversity in the legal sector, but said that firms need to be clearer about what they are trying to achieve. Firms need to concentrate on how many people from diverse backgrounds they can retain rather than the number they can recruit. In particular, Spencer argued that distinct firm cultures - something many City leaders pride themselves on - can cause problems if they mean people from all backgrounds are forced to try and fit into the same mould. "Diversity is a given - everyone is different. The task is managing inclusion. If you start by looking to change your diversity you are conceptually starting in the wrong place," Spencer said.Delegates, including diversity officers and human resources managers from many of the City's largest firms, were also told to view Government diversity legislation as the base level below which no-one should sink. Current legislation deals with discrimination on the grounds of race, religion, age and sex, but there are other areas that can make people feel uncomfortable or isolated. To this end, Spencer argued firms need to be aware of the message they are sending to the market if they want to attract and retain the best talent. Spencer said: "The recruitment process starts before you actually decide to go out and look for people. It is all to do with your image and the market perception of you as an office, as a firm and as an industry." He also cautioned that recruiting from 'non-traditional backgrounds' should not mean lowering standards. He argued maintaining a 2:1 degree barrier was fine as long as, within that bracket, law firms ensure they are attracting the most diverse group of recruits. His words come against a backdrop of law firms looking at broadening recruitment criteria to include aptitude and psychometric testing rather than just academic qualifications. Norton Rose is considering axing the minimum requirement of a 2:1 degree from training contract applicants, while Herbert Smith is also in the process of reviewing its application process.Despite the additional costs involved in increasing diversity, firms were warned not to reduce efforts to recruit a mixed workforce as a result of the global economic crisis and cost-cutting.SSQ director Gavin Sharpe likewise told delegates at the event, which was supported by Legal Week, that law firms tackling diversity should avoid knee-jerk reactions. He said: "Diversity panics partners. They say 'let's have someone with a 2:2 from an ethnic minority. That is not what I think diversity is about."
October 02, 2008 at 01:59 AM
3 minute read
Recruiting a diverse workforce is easy but top City law firms are falling down when it comes to creating an inclusive atmosphere where lawyers from all backgrounds want to stay and build their careers.
Leading diversity consultant Linbert Spencer (pictured) told delegates at a Shilton Sharpe Quarry (SSQ) forum last week, that inclusion is one of the hardest issues facing law firms today – rather than the initial recruitment of minority workers.
Spencer applauded the efforts already being made to encourage diversity in the legal sector, but said that firms need to be clearer about what they are trying to achieve. Firms need to concentrate on how many people from diverse backgrounds they can retain rather than the number they can recruit.
In particular, Spencer argued that distinct firm cultures – something many City leaders pride themselves on – can cause problems if they mean people from all backgrounds are forced to try and fit into the same mould.
"Diversity is a given – everyone is different. The task is managing inclusion. If you start by looking to change your diversity you are conceptually starting in the wrong place," Spencer said.
Delegates, including diversity officers and human resources managers from many of the City's largest firms, were also told to view Government diversity legislation as the base level below which no-one should sink. Current legislation deals with discrimination on the grounds of race, religion, age and sex, but there are other areas that can make people feel uncomfortable or isolated. To this end, Spencer argued firms need to be aware of the message they are sending to the market if they want to attract and retain the best talent.
Spencer said: "The recruitment process starts before you actually decide to go out and look for people. It is all to do with your image and the market perception of you as an office, as a firm and as an industry."
He also cautioned that recruiting from 'non-traditional backgrounds' should not mean lowering standards. He argued maintaining a 2:1 degree barrier was fine as long as, within that bracket, law firms ensure they are attracting the most diverse group of recruits.
His words come against a backdrop of law firms looking at broadening recruitment criteria to include aptitude and psychometric testing rather than just academic qualifications. Norton Rose is considering axing the minimum requirement of a 2:1 degree from training contract applicants, while Herbert Smith is also in the process of reviewing its application process.
Despite the additional costs involved in increasing diversity, firms were warned not to reduce efforts to recruit a mixed workforce as a result of the global economic crisis and cost-cutting.
SSQ director Gavin Sharpe likewise told delegates at the event, which was supported by Legal Week, that law firms tackling diversity should avoid knee-jerk reactions. He said: "Diversity panics partners. They say 'let's have someone with a 2:2 from an ethnic minority. That is not what I think diversity is about."
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 AllTrending Stories
- 1Cars Reach Record Fuel Economy but Largely Fail to Meet Biden's EPA Standard, Agency Says
- 2How Cybercriminals Exploit Law Firms’ Holiday Vulnerabilities
- 3DOJ Asks 5th Circuit to Publish Opinion Upholding Gun Ban for Felon
- 4GEO Group Sued Over 2 Wrongful Deaths
- 5Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
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