Reverse mentoring the senior partner: Allen & Overy's Dejonghe and his female mentor on their honest conversations
A&O banking counsel Catherine Lang-Anderson on mentoring the magic circle firm's senior partner
March 08, 2018 at 04:15 AM
6 minute read
Allen & Overy (A&O) senior partner Wim Dejonghe has been mentored by London banking counsel Catherine Lang-Anderson since September 2016.
At that point, the firm was piloting reverse mentoring, with Dejonghe one of seven 'guinea pigs' on the board signing up as a test case, being paired with Lang-Anderson, who has two children and works three days a week.
Since then, the scheme has remained in place in London for both the board and the 12-strong people and performance board, and can also be used by other partners.
While the scheme is relatively informal with no set obligations on how frequently mentors and mentees must meet, Dejonghe and Lang-Anderson meet for about an hour every six weeks.
Here, they discuss the benefits and key challenges of 'reverse mentoring' and what they have both learnt from it.
Why did you sign up to reverse mentoring?
Wim Dejonghe: Diversity is a key strategic priority for us, and the only way to truly understand the challenges our female lawyers face is to find time to listen to them in a space that is open and honest. That was our motivation for introducing the programme and it has been very successful.
How often do you meet and how much time do you spend mentoring Wim?
Cathering Lang-Anderson: Every six weeks or so for about an hour. It is testament to Wim's commitment to the programme that our meetings have never been cancelled or postponed despite his busy global schedule – and we have been known to run over our time slot!
Our first meeting got off to a slightly stressful start. With the meeting scheduled to begin first thing in the morning, I found myself wrestling with an unexpected childcare crisis and then with a late running train.
That left me sprinting into the office – meeting my PA in the lift to swap my trainers for heels – and bowling into Wim's office several minutes late. But, in a way, it was the perfect introduction as by the end of the first meeting I had told him all about my tricky morning. It's helpful for him to hear about real-world practical things like juggling work, kids and the London travel system. All meetings since then have been scheduled in the afternoon!
What have you learnt from your mentee/mentor?
WD: Catherine is very active in her approach to diversity. She doesn't just try to find the right balance for her, her husband and her kids, but she also tries to be a role model and prove to others that a balance can be achieved. Our sessions have given me the chance not just to understand where the obstacles to progression lie, but also to brainstorm ideas with her about potential solutions.
CLA: One thing I know from my meetings with Wim is that there is a genuine desire to break the logjam for women and a realisation that it will harm our business if we don't succeed in doing so. The firm is 100% behind changing things and is prepared to take bold steps to do so. Initiatives like reverse mentoring aren't lip service but one part of a serious effort to find solutions.
Can you name a couple of examples of what you have worked on with Wim?
CLA: Our meetings have focused mostly on diversity, and particularly on finding ways to make sure more women progress to partnership and into leadership positions – one of the five strategic priorities Wim has set for his time as senior partner and the one that is proving hardest to crack. I have given Wim an open and honest insight into the challenges I face as a lawyer in a busy transactional practice, working part time and juggling family life with my five-year-old twin boys and my husband, who is also a busy lawyer.
What are the key challenges to making the reverse mentor relationship work effectively?
WD: The powerful thing about reverse mentoring is the opportunity for honest conversations, so you have to establish a working relationship which enables that in order to get the most from it.
CLA: For me it was avoiding the temptation to seek mentoring from Wim rather than the other way around!
What has been a career-defining moment for you?
WD: There has definitely been more than one but one that stands out for me was becoming managing partner of [Belgian firm] Loeff Claeys Verbeke at the age of 34. I was granted the benefit of the doubt by senior figures at the firm and they let me run with it.
CLA: Closing the groundbreaking Metinvest financial restructuring and having my interviews for promotion to counsel in the same week. It was a very busy week but one in which a lot of things I had been working towards for some time came together.
What else would you like to see law firms do to improve gender equality in the workplace?
WD: This topic is one that is very close to my heart, and the main point for me is against presenteesim. It's hard to draw the line between work and life in this profession and the key to doing this is enabling more flexible working without guilt. To achieve that, you need to build a culture that allows for this and involves everyone in the firm – partners, associates, male, female. We should also lead by example. I have always worked flexibly and do so now. The challenges are different for everyone, and I've learnt a lot from reverse mentoring on what we can do to make flexible working practical for all our people.
CLA: There is now a realisation in firms that things need to change, not just because it is the right thing to do but because it will harm our businesses if we don't and because our clients are increasingly focused on this. Law firms need to take more radical steps to make faster progress in this area around sponsorship, mentoring, accountability and more flexibility in ways of working while delivering great client service.
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 AllHow to Build an Arbitration Practice: An Interview with 37-Year HSF Veteran Paula Hodges
Scratching the Entrepreneurial Itch: Linklaters' AI Head On Becoming a Partner and GenAI Hallucinations
'Relationships are Everything': Clifford Chance's Melissa Fogarty Talks Getting on Big Deals and Rising to the Top
7 minute readThe 'Returnity' Crisis: Is the Legal Profession Failing Women Lawyers Returning From Maternity Leave?
8 minute readTrending Stories
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