LGBT: Law Firm Asset or Liability?

Fifteen years ago, I attended my first law firm diversity roundtable. I was relatively new to the legal industry and just coming into a solid understanding of the problem:  law firms are hardly, if at all, diverse. Caught up by the enthusiasm of the speakers, I walked away feeling upbeat.  I thought that the speakers would turn things around through sheer force of will. It seemed to me that by forming associations, growing awareness of the problem and launching internal and external initiatives, law firms would recognize the issue and take steps toward amending it. Geesh, was I wrong.

You don’t have to look far to discover that not much has changed. A recent Washington Post article by Deborah L. Rhode sums it up eloquently with the title, “Law is the least diverse profession in the nation. And lawyers aren’t doing enough to change that.” With decades of discussion and action on behalf of minority communities and law firm leaders alike, you have to wonder, “Why such little change over some many years?”.

It isn’t completely due to fewer minority students entering law school. It certainly isn’t for lack of intellect on behalf of the legal community: lawyers spend their days and nights unraveling complicated financial, emotional and physical problems….so what gives? Why can’t lawyers apply those problem-solving skills to the diversity riddle?

By narrowing the issue down to the LGBT community, at least part of the resistance becomes apparent: you can’t welcome minorities into your ranks with one hand, while pointing fingers at them with the other. It is a contradiction unique to the legal industry in many respects, corporate firms are responsible for advising companies of potential risk related to the same community which they are trying to recruit. This contradiction shows in content.

Over the last couple of months, the United States adopted a sea of laws and guidelines surrounding the LBGT Community including Obergefell Et Al. v. Hodges in June and recent OSHA and EEOC guidelines. With new laws and guidelines comes questions from employers about how best to navigate new policies and therefore analysis from law firms in the form of client alerts, blog posts, newsletters etc. Reading through the analysis, the contradiction is apparent: many alerts call out transgender people as a potential source of liability (i.e. – Implement this new bathroom policy today so that Adam, now Amanda, won’t sue tomorrow). Of course the content isn't that blatant but the sentiment is obvious. The same firms issuing these alerts have diversity tabs adorning their websites and sponsor local diversity initiatives. It begs the question, do communications teams run LBGT content by their diversity committees prior to publication? Would calling on a member of the LGBT community to read an alert about LGBT issues help firms identify unintentional bias? It might, at least, be a good way to foster a more inclusive culture.

There are a handful of authors who’ve navigated the recent changes beautifully. Such alerts typically provide a historical background on LGBT legislation, are longer form and provide a hearty summary of why the legislation was enacted illustrating what it means to employers and employees alike. These firms aren’t just saying they believe in diversity, they're proving it with thoughtful, objective analysis of complicated issues. It's obvious that this content isn't written in haste as a way of participating in a news cycle.

Companies will continue to call for greater diversity among relationship partners, just check out Microsoft's recent announcement. As your online, 24/7 brochure, content can help potential clients determine whether or not your firm has the experience and values to help their business. Taking the time to craft inclusive content is one way to make certain potential clients (and recruits) see you in the best light.

Image Courtesy of By chtfj21 ("chtfj21"'s Flickr account) [CC BY-SA 2.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

What will it take to Earn Social Media Respect among Law Firms?

Picture a smiling young mother with her smiling young daughter sitting happily in her arms. The associated LinkedIn Update reads: “Enjoying lunch with my cutie pie! So grateful to my firm for supporting on-site childcare and working mothers.”

Now, picture a glossy brochure with infographics, stock photos and a compelling pull quote from the managing partner extolling the firm’s long-standing efforts to promote work/life balance.

Both are recent examples from the same firm: one came as the result of a happy parent sharing her experience working as an associate at an AmLaw 200 firm, the other the result of countless dollars and hours spent on a marketing piece to garner publicity for their commitment to the cause. Which is more compelling? Would the happy mother’s message be amplified by a like, share or comment from the firm’s managing partner? More to the point, what is the return on investment for each kind of publicity?

For a long time publicity could generally be counted in two buckets: paid or earned. Paid media was much simpler to identify during the print era. It was either a display advertisement, positioned and marked in a special paid advertising section or buried in the back of the book as a directory or classified ad. Earned media, on the other hand, held a special sway and more respect. Earned media was that which, well, an organization or person earned through their efforts in the form of a journalistic article. Of course there has always been a lot going on behind the scenes as in-house and external PR teams work hard, make pitches and deliver experts to a reporter pre-deadline earning coveted spots on short-lists of people to call. Quotes from high-powered attorneys and article placements aren’t always earned on merit, sometimes it’s the right person at the right time.

But as social media and other technologies that make it easier for reporters to easily cull a wide variety of sources for their stories have grown, the definitions of earned versus paid media (especially in the legal industry) remain largely the same. It’s time for a new definition of earned media that includes credit for authentic and organic endorsements of a service or product on social media.

You don’t have to take my word for it. Consider last week’s Bloomberg BNA post from the Global Chairman of Baker & McKenzie, Eduardo C. Leite, “Why Social Media Matters for Law Firms”. Mr. Leite is proud to be part of the 5% of AmLaw 100 Managing Partners on Twitter. He cites, among many reasons, the fact that in five years, “…50 percent of the global workforce will be members of Generation Y and Generation Z. They have grown up connected, collaborative and mobile.”

Jennifer Risi, MD of Ogilvy Media Influence captures the sentiment in an article about a recent survey. She says, “Our savviest clients know they need to have a mix of traditional, social, and paid. It all needs to work together. They’re seeing the power of earned, and they’re seeing the return they’re getting because it’s very cost-effective, and when people tell your story for you, without having to pay for it, that’s very powerful”.

Social media enables people to tell your story without having to pay for it. It enables the good work your firm does to see the light of day. If guided correctly, social media can grow in power and take your story further. Managing Partners like Mr. Leite will be glad to see a continuation of the status quo: as his competition postpones and discounts the use of social media he will go about earning the powerful stories of tomorrow.