'Complacent' law firm leaders accused of not calling out 'micro-aggressions'
Major study finds junior lawyers from tougher backgrounds being held back by routine denigration
October 02, 2018 at 10:33 AM
6 minute read
A new study on social mobility in law, backed by eight top law firms, has found that many junior lawyers from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are being held back from progressing – despite being better performers – due in part to the "micro-aggressions" they face on a daily basis.
The research, which was compiled in conjunction with Linklaters, Allen & Overy, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner, Clifford Chance, Dentons, Hogan Lovells, HFW and Pinsent Masons, finds "significant" evidence of such micro-aggressions – defined as "everyday words or acts that communicate denigrating messages to certain groups who are perceived as different, for example by gender, ethnicity, and/or socioeconomic background".
The report also accuses some law firm leaders of "complacency" for not calling out such behaviour and, as a result, contributing to environments in which individuals can feel isolated and struggle to progress.
The study, which draws on data from more than 2,800 early-career professionals, as well as 14 interviews with senior partners and law firm leaders, was put together in collaboration with UK social mobility foundation The Sutton Trust and independent policy association The Bridge Group.
➤➤ Diversity and inclusion, in particular gender equality, is the focus of day two of LegalWeek CONNECT, taking place on 28-29 November at County Hall, London SE1. Click here for more information
The report describes the "intense pressure" junior lawyers from lower socioeconomic backgrounds face to fit in and "assimilate into the dominant culture". It argues that although encouraging efforts have been made by law firms to improve diversity in their recruitment processes, much less attention has been paid to tracking how trainees progress, and how that correlates to their socioeconomic background.
"To date, the focus has been primarily on who gets in, rather than who stays on, who gets ahead, and how," the report states.
In one particularly concerning finding, the report states that although those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are more likely to receive higher performance ratings – among state-school trainees, 14% receive the highest performance ratings, compared to 8% of independently educated trainees – they are simultaneously less likely on average to progress in their early career.
The research finds that the proportion of first-generation early-career solicitors falls from 30% of trainees to 27% of associates, while state school-educated trainees comprise 55% of trainee leavers, compared to 57% of associate leavers.
The report explains that traits perceived as important for career progression are closely linked to background, but the report notes that "these that have little correlation with work performance". Some of the traits considered important by the surveyed lawyers include being "confident", "charismatic", "driven", "ambitious", having "gravitas" and being good "self-promoters".
Conversations that centre around skiing and exotic holidays are exclusionary, and people who can't relate will naturally withdraw
Linklaters diversity and wellbeing adviser Jenny Lloyd says: "These findings are uncomfortable, because they challenge the assumption that once access to the profession has been gained, progression will be based on merit. If firms want to retain their best talent, work needs to be done to change the way 'talent' is defined so that a premium is not placed on qualities like 'social nous', which has little to do with someone's ability to do the job."
Interviewees for the study describe the pressure to fit in as "exhausting", "tricky", and "worrying", and cite coping strategies such as toning down their accents, adjusting their speech, and avoiding certain conversation topics or feigning interest in others.
"The interview feedback highlights that progression is strongly affected by visibility and extroversion, but for individuals who feel different to their colleagues, this is a barrier," says Lloyd. "Conversations that centre around skiing and exotic holidays are exclusionary, and people who can't relate to these topics will naturally withdraw."
The report states that while there is often "no overt intention to offend", the prevalence of micro-aggressions can make individuals from minority groups feel inferior or excluded.
Lloyd explains: "We have to assume they're unintentional, but we need to raise awareness of the impact they can have for people on the receiving end. The report highlights that micro-aggressions are not just top-down, but they often start at the peer level. For trainees joining as part of an intake, the result will be that they start to feel that they don't 'fit' very quickly."
Although the report does not place the blame solely on senior law firm partners, it does cite evidence from the research interviews of "complacency" among some senior leaders, suggesting they are not sufficiently "diligent" in calling out such behaviour.
The report suggests some short- and long-term strategies for law firms to tackle the issues it raises, including taking steps to "actively engage" with new lawyers who may potentially be affected, and to raise awareness of the "drivers and actions associated with diversity and inclusion at all levels". Examples of such projects include reverse mentoring schemes, such as those now in place at Linklaters and Allen & Overy.
With regards to how progress can be made, the report includes a series of recommendations, including that law firms should submit detailed workforce diversity data – including information on pay – to a "trusted third party to benchmark data anonymously across the sector", a task that it suggests could be carried out by the PRIME programme, the social mobility initiative launched by a raft of major law firms in 2011. Law firms are already required to report data about the diversity make-up of their workforce to the Solicitors Regulation Authority every two years.
Lloyd adds: "The research has provided us with a lot of valuable information, which will inform our approach to inclusion going forwards. We will start by conducting focus groups on the key themes from the research to see what rings true with our people. It reinforces the importance of creating a firm culture where individuals from all backgrounds feel welcomed and will thrive."
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 AllLawyers Should Only Use AI For Low-end Tasks, Regulators in Australia Say
3 minute readDLA Piper’s Pro Referee: In Both Law and Football, ‘You're Prosecutor & Kindergarten Teacher’
3 minute readAsia Hires: Baker McKenzie Partner Exits For Singapore Boutique & Other Moves
Trending Stories
- 1Amid 'Existential War for Talent', Paul Weiss Promotes Both Equity and Non-Equity Partners
- 2After Regime Change, Syria Remains Liable in US Federal Courts for Alleged Assad-era Terrorism Support
- 3Prosecutors Want Tom Girardi to Serve 14 Years In Prison. His Lawyers Don't Want Him Behind Bars.
- 4Atkins Likely to Bring Pro-Business, Light Regulatory Touch to SEC, Say Agency Observers
- 5The Boom Continues: These Firms All Opened New Florida Offices in 2024
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