header-logo header-logo

26 June 2019
Issue: 7846 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-detail

Balancing the boardroom

Law firms are generally making progress when it comes to boosting the number of women in leadership roles―but some mentoring initiatives may be backfiring.

Only 22% of equity partners at law firms are women, compared to 61% of trainees. Research by Thomson Reuters and Acritas, published this week, identified some successful initiatives: for example, 69% of firms have a board level representative who focuses on diversity, and 60% of firms have voluntarily added partners into their gender pay gap reporting.

The research, ‘Transforming women’s leadership in the law’, was conducted with 48 leading UK and European law firms. Nearly half (46%) the firms include a representative gender balance in all pitches to potential clients; 30% ensure a representative gender balance on all client teams; and 42% ensure slates of candidates up for promotion are gender balanced.

It identified three themes vital to success: make gender diversity a strategic goal and pursue it by setting targets, tracking progress and appointing a board representative; ensure female lawyers get sufficient client exposure and access to a wide range of work; and reconsider ‘women-only’ initiatives and check mentors are giving the right advice.

Interestingly, the researchers found that some initiatives correlate with less success: for example, women-only networks did not improve progress whereas opening those networks up to include men had a more positive impact. Similarly, the research suggested advice given by mentors can sometimes put women off the partnership track rather than provide encouragement.

Lisa Hart Shepherd, CEO of Acritas, said: ‘The research has delivered some surprising insights that are consistent with broader diversity research which suggests some diversity programs have a negative effect.

‘It is important for firms to take a step back and review their portfolio of initiatives and check that they are working holistically to positive effect in their current form.’

Last week, the Law Society, Bar Council, The Chartered Institute of Legal Executives, firms and chambers launched a Women in Law pledge, promising to support the promotion of women into senior roles, to set an action plan and targets, and to publicly report on progress.

The Law Society also published its ‘International Women in Law’ report, a global study on female lawyers across the globe. It identified unequal remuneration, a lack of flexible working and traditional gender roles and stereotypes as some of the key challenges faced by female lawyers.

Law Society president Christina Blacklaws said the research found ‘significant barriers to progression’. 

Issue: 7846 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll