Measuring Progress: A Look at the Results of the Vault/MCCA® Guide to Law Firm Diversity Programs

In the spring of 2004, more than 200 of the top law firms in the country were invited to participate in the first annual Vault/MCCA^® Law Firm Diversity Survey (Survey). That fall, Vault Inc. and the Minority Corporate Counsel Association (MCCA) released the first edition of the Vault/MCCA^® Guide to Law Firm Diversity Programs (the Guide). Driven by a team of general counsel searching for an effective means to track law firm performance in the area of diversity, and produced through partnership between MCCA and Vault, the Guide serves as a means for law students and corporate counsel alike to evaluate diversity programs among the largest and most prestigious law firms in the nation.

Now in its third edition, the Guide includes over 1,200 pages of self-reported data from 193 law firms, with a focus on firm demographics, diversity initiatives, and leadership, as well as strategies for recruitment, retention, and promotion.

Law Firm Participation

In the Guide’s inaugural edition, 152 of the 203 invitees, or 75 percent, responded. The next year, the number of participating firms climbed to 159. This year, participation increased even more substantially: Of the 204 invited firms, 180—approximately 88 percent—submitted survey responses. This represents an increase of 21 firms (nearly 10 percent) over last year. Moreover, the new additions include more than a dozen law firms that had been previously invited but had declined to participate—all of which suggests that the Guide is in fact becoming the valuable benchmarking tool that its designers envisioned.

For the first time, this edition of the Guide offered law firms outside the nation’s top 200 the opportunity to participate through sponsorship. This year’s Guide includes surveys from 13 gold sponsors in addition to the 180 invitees, providing a total of 193 law firm profiles.

Survey Methodology

Broadly defining diversity to include “male and female minorities, white women, openly gay and lesbian attorneys, and attorneys with disabilities or physical challenges,” the 2006 Survey solicited information for four diverse categories among the U.S. attorney population: minority men, minority women, white women, and gay/lesbian lawyers, with breakdowns by attorney level (for example, equity partner, non-equity partner, associate, of counsel, summer associate). This year, the Survey was expanded to specifically address attorneys with disabilities or other physical challenges.¹ Through statistical charts, multiple-choice and short-answer questions, and a final narrative statement, the Vault/MCCA Law Firm Survey provided firms with an opportunity not only to release raw numerical data but also to publish their views on diversity and to expand on past, ongoing, and future initiatives. Although firms were permitted to skip questions, they were encouraged to complete the entire survey, and most firms responded to most questions.

The Latest Findings

The data collected shows gradual improvement in diversity for minorities at all levels, as highlighted by the following charts.

As this data suggests, both minorities and white women are underrepresented among the partnership ranks. Nevertheless, the situation is improving, albeit slowly. For example, examining the total population of equity partners versus new equity partner hires shows that the most recent pool of equity partners reflects greater representation of women and minorities than the general population of equity partners. At the very top levels—in firm governing committees—the industry is also seeing very gradual improvement.

However, these numbers should be put into context. Of the firms reporting such data, 120 out of 179 (67.0 percent) have no minority men on their governing committees. And 152 of 179 (84.9 percent) have no minority women. Well more than half—103 out of 179 firms, or 57.5 percent—have no minorities at all on their governing committees. The numbers are much better for women in general—81.1 percent of firms have women on their governing committees, and more than half of these firms have more than one. (The vast majority of these are white women: One hundred forty three of 180 firms report having white women, while three firms have minority women but no white women.)

For the past two years, the Survey has also asked firms to report data on their gay and lesbian populations. (See the initial data on this page.)

These percentages are based only on firms that said they tracked such data. For 2005, 63.21 percent of the firms surveyed reported gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender (GLBT) data.

Noteworthy Trends

Beyond the numbers, the Survey findings show increased activity in several key areas: commitment of firm leadership, recruitment efforts, retention strategies, and pipeline programs.

Evidence of Firms’ Commitment

According to this year’s Guide, by now virtually all surveyed firms (186 firms, or 96 percent) have established or are currently developing both a diversity action plan and a diversity committee with specific goals and accountability to management. In addition to a diversity committee or council, many firms also have a full-time director of diversity to oversee initiatives and help track the firm’s progress.

As evidence of their commitment, many law firms feature a diversity page on their website or intranet, and nearly two dozen firms specifically identify diversity as one of their “core values.” While the majority of law firms surveyed—165 firms—report that they have already completed or are currently in the process of completing diversity training for all attorneys and staff, 19 firms indicated that such training is “not a current priority,” as stated in the Guide.³

Through regular dissemination of information via firmwide emails, partner meetings, diversity newsletters, annual retreats, conferences, and other diversity-related events, it seems that diversity has become at least a widely discussed topic at most top firms. More important, however, is whether a diverse workforce is actually promoted, measured, and maintained. Of the surveyed firms, most have set strategic goals in order to measure progress in this area. Typically, either the diversity committee or the diversity director submits regular reports to firm management. At Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Nicholson Graham LLP, for example, the firm’s chief diversity officer reports quarterly to the management committee “on all diversity initiatives, development, and progress.” At Holland & Hart LLP, “The firm’s diversity demographics are tracked, examined, and distributed on a monthly basis for review by both the Diversity Committee and the Management Committee.”

Ensuring Progress Through Accountability

In addition, many firms use performance evaluations to hold diversity committee members accountable for their efforts. At Weil, Gotshal & Manges, for example, “Partner members of the Diversity Committee are reviewed by the committee chair on an annual basis as part of annual partner review.”  Others go one step further, requiring not just committee members but all partners to describe their contributions to diversity (for example, Crowell & Moring LLP, Foley & Lardner LLP, Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP, and Winston & Strawn, LLP). At a few firms, including Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon LLP, all attorneys, not just partners, are required to provide such reports. Shook, Hardy & Bacon, LLP “stresses individual accountability by requiring each attorney to complete a ‘diversity checklist.’” At Dickstein Shapiro LLP, “Diversity-related efforts and results are factored into individual evaluations for partners, associates, and staff participating in those activities.”  In addition, the firm is one of several in which “partner compensation has been tied directly to diversity efforts.” As Crowell & Moring’s profile notes, judging individual diversity contributions as part of the compensation process gives each partner “a direct economic incentive to do his or her part to help make sure that the firm accomplishes its goals.” Providing billable credit for diversity-related activities is another means to encourage and reward such efforts.

In addition to such internal forms of accountability, law firms are also subject to external mechanisms. Many firms have signed bar association pledges to increase the hiring, retention, and promotion of minorities or women, such as the Association of the Bar of the City of New York’s “Statement of Diversity Principles” and the Bar Association of San Francisco’s “Breaking the Glass Ceiling Commitment,” and they submit progress reports in keeping with those commitments. Perhaps more significantly, law firms remain accountable to their clients. As Winston & Strawn LLP notes, “More and more clients request diversity statistics generally, as it applies to their matters,” and several firms specifically cite client demands and influence as both the primary form of accountability and the driving force behind the firm’s diversity initiatives.

Recruitment Initiatives to Increase Diversity

Both the data and the narrative responses in this year’s Guide indicate that law firms are making a serious effort to recruit a diverse body of young lawyers. Methods include recruiting at schools with diverse populations, participating in or sponsoring diversity job fairs, working with law student affinity groups, hosting events, and funding law school scholarships. One increasingly popular strategy for bringing in more summer associates of color is a program specifically for diverse first-year law students, in addition to the standard program for second-year students.

With summer associate ranks for 2005 closely mirroring the current law school population, these recruitment strategies seem to be bearing fruit. According to a recent report of the American Bar Association (ABA) Section of Legal Education and Admission to the Bar, minority enrollment for the academic year 2005–06 represented 21.2 percent of total juris doctorate enrollment at 191 law schools, while for that same year, women represented 47.5 percent of total enrollment. According to the Guide, the 2005 summer associate class at the nation’s top firms included 26.71 percent students of color and 47.07 percent women.⁴

For lateral recruitment, the trends are more ambiguous. Several firms, including Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC; Heller Ehrman LLP; and Saul Ewing LLP, report engaging in aggressive efforts to hire more diverse partners, a strategy that may also help retain younger attorneys of color by providing them with mentors and role models. Nevertheless, the overall percentage of minority attorneys hired laterally—whether as associate, of counsel, or partner—actually dropped slightly, from 18.00 percent in 2004 to 16.99 percent in 2005. And the number of minority partner hires in particular has diminished, from 10.53 percent in 2004 to 8.88 percent in 2005. On the other hand, the number of women hired laterally in 2005 increased, from 35.41 percent to 37.85 percent.

Strategies to Reduce Attrition

Low retention of both minority and women lawyers may be the single greatest obstacle that law firms face in the drive for greater diversity. Although the Survey shows that attrition rates—as a percentage of the total number of attorneys who left voluntarily or involuntarily in 2005—are down for all diverse categories, the changes are so small as to be statistically insignificant, at least with respect to minority men.⁵ Moreover, the still substantial differences in population as lawyers advance from law student to associate to partner provide stark statistical evidence that not nearly enough is being done to retain minority and women attorneys.

In response to this problem, law firms have established methods to track firmwide demographics and, as Saul Ewing puts it, “movement within the attorney workforce, broken down by race and gender.” Many firms conduct separation or exit interviews with departing attorneys; Foley & Lardner LLP even hires an outside consultant to do so. Law firms have also stepped up their efforts to increase retention, in what seems to be a two-pronged approach: One aspect aims at making the law firm a more welcoming and inclusive environment, while the other focuses on fulfillment of attorneys’ professional goals.

Specific activities include supporting internal affinity groups and women’s initiatives, formalizing part-time/alternative work schedule policies, and improving benefits. A number of firms hold firmwide diversity retreats for their women, minority, or GLBT populations. Domestic partner benefits are increasingly common, as are parental leave packages that go beyond the legally mandated minimum. A few firms, such as Alston & Bird LLP and Arnold & Porter LLP, have on-site child care facilities or provide back-up day care. Most participating firms have established a formal part-time/flex-time policy that permits attorneys to remain on track for partnership, although it should be noted that the number of associates that in fact do become partner while working part time remains very small.

At most firms, professional development is an area of increasing emphasis.

Nearly all firms report expansion or establishment of mentoring and career development programs. Some programs specifically target minority or women lawyers or make an effort to pair associates with attorneys of similar diversity, while most reflect broader development efforts aimed at the entire staff. Some specific initiatives include retaining career coaches; making mentoring mandatory for all new attorneys; reviewing mentor-mentee relationships to make sure they are fruitful; meeting individually with all minority attorneys or diverse focus groups; establishing benchmarks for attorney advancement; and monitoring associates’ progress, to try to ensure that the needs and goals of all associates, particularly diverse associates, are being met.

Promotion and Leadership Opportunities

Although the number of minorities and women in the partnership ranks has increased slightly, the figures still suggest dramatic room for improvement. The percentage of minority partners (both equity and non-equity) has increased from 4.73 percent to 5.44 percent, while the number of women partners has inched up from 17.33 percent to 17.73 percent. The number of minorities and women at the top levels of management remains small. Firms report that minorities represent just 4.68 percent of their management/executive committees, while women represent 13.84 percent (compared to 4.03 percent and 13.83 percent, respectively, for 2004).

One way for diverse attorneys to gain more visibility and responsibility is through leadership of a practice group or department. This year, just over half of the responding firms (102 law firms) reported that at least one practice group is led by an attorney of color. Roughly 10 percent (19 firms) reported at least three minority practice group leaders. Two of those firms—Hunton & Williams LLP and Greenberg Traurig, LLP—are among the very few top firms in the country to be led by an attorney who is not Caucasian: Cesar L. Alvarez has served as the president and CEO of Greenberg Traurig for the last decade, and Walfrido J. Martinez is the managing partner at Hunton & Williams. Moreover, both firms boast minority partnership numbers well above the industry norm. In 2005, minorities comprised 8.29 percent of the total partnership at Greenberg Traurig, compared to the survey-wide average of 5.44 percent. Minorities at Hunton & Williams made up 7.40 percent of the partnership ranks.⁶ These firms’ minority leadership may be a strong factor in the diversity of the partnership ranks.

Ten firms report more than three attorneys of color as heads of practice groups: Baker Botts L.L.P.; Baker Hostetler; Bingham McCutchen LLP; Covington & Burling LLP; DLA Piper; Foley & Lardner; Hunton & Williams; McGuireWoods LLP; Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP; and Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP.

Dickinson Wright PLLC, whose chairman, Dennis W. Archer, is African American, also reports a significant number of minority attorneys at the leadership level. Two of the 14 members (14.29 percent) of the firm’s management-level committee are minorities. In 2005, minorities made up 6.11 percent of the firm’s total partnership and 5.81 percent of its equity partners, compared to the survey-wide averages of 5.44 percent and 4.89 percent, respectively.

In June 2005, Shearman & Sterling LLP elected Rohan S. Weerasinghe, a native Sri Lankan, as the firm’s new senior partner. Although the numbers reported by Shearman with respect to its 2005 minority population are close to the survey-wide averages,⁷ it will be interesting to see how the demographics might change under the leadership of Weerasinghe, who also sits on the firm’s diversity committee. In this context, it is worth noting that the percentage of minority attorneys hired by Shearman in 2005 (whether associate or partner) is substantially higher than the survey-wide average: 23.23 percent, compared to 16.99 percent.

Reaching Out Through Networks and Pipelines

This year’s Guide reflects increasing interest in strategies designed to promote diversity both within individual law firms and, more broadly, in the legal community. Many firms are involved in “pipeline” programs designed to encourage diverse attorneys to enter the legal workforce. Law firms are funding college scholarships or LSAT preparation courses, providing mentoring to high school students (for example, through Sponsors for Educational Opportunity), offering internships to students through INROADS (which places ethnically diverse high school and college students in multiyear internships at Fortune 500 companies and other major organizations) or similar programs, and participating in career day events or mock-trial programs for students as young as middle school or even grade school.

Firms are also working in partnership with other law firms, diversity-related organizations such as MCCA, and their own corporate clients to effect change. Many, if not most, surveyed firms sponsor or participate in minority networking series, diversity-related conferences, or job fairs, in partnership with bar associations, other law firms, or local businesses. For example, many of the firms with offices in the Northeast are members of The Boston Lawyers Group (BLG), a consortium of law firms and other legal organizations that promotes the recruitment, development, and retention of attorneys of color. Most firms also encourage individual attorneys to join diverse bar associations and assume leadership roles, often providing billable credit for such diversity-related activities.

This year’s Guide indicates small—but significant—gains for diverse attorneys in most areas, though it also highlights the need for increased effort in the area of retention and promotion. Substantial gaps remain between rhetoric and achievement, between recruitment and retention, between entry-level attorneys and management-level populations. Yet, the fact that more law firms are agreeing to publish internal statistics and to share information on their diversity initiatives is encouraging proof that they are willing to try to bridge those gaps. The Vault/MCCA Guide to Law Firm Diversity Programs will only become more valuable each year, as law firm participation increases and progress can be measured over time.  DB

1. Because such numbers are relatively small and many firms do not track this information, the data was not included in the demographic charts but provided in a separate section of the Survey. Of the participating firms, roughly one-third completed this section.
2. Note that some firms did not distinguish between equity and non-equity partners.
3. The remaining firms did not respond to this portion of the Survey.
4. Although the percentage of minority summer associates seems to exceed the minority student population, the difference could be due in part to different definitions of “minority.” While the Vault/MCCA Survey definition of minority includes attorneys of Middle Eastern descent, the ABA—like the EEOC—characterizes Middle Eastern as White/Caucasian.
5. The number of minority men who left participating firms as a percentage of the total number of departing attorneys dropped from 8.10 percent in 2004 to 7.97 percent in 2005; the percentage of minority women decreased from 9.19 percent to 8.75 percent. White women seem to have made more noticeable gains: In 2004, 32.81 percent of departing attorneys were white women, while in 2005 they represented 31.43 percent.
6. These statistics include both equity and non-equity partners at Hunton & Williams, and all shareholders at Greenberg Traurig.
7. For example, in 2005, minority men and women made up 4.27 percent of the firm’s partners and 24.28 percent of associates.

From the March/April 2007 issue of Diversity & The Bar^®