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
No comments:
Post a Comment