Uploaded on

 

More in: Career , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
452
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. 2011 Diversity Survey Update: Key Findings * Presented by: Leslie M. Altman * Source 2011 MSBA Diversity Survey UpdateMay 2012
  • 2. History• 1992 HCBA produces Glass Ceiling Task Force Report• 1992 Self Audit for Gender Equity (SAGE) program starts• 2002 First SAGE study• 2003 MSBA approves SAGE Best Practices• 2005-06 MSBA Task Force on diversity gender, race, sexual orientation, religion, disability• 2010 - 2011 Diversity Survey Update
  • 3. MethodologyEmployer survey• 42 law firm participants• 65 non firm participants • Included questions about # of GLBT and disabled attorneysIndividual survey • 1,100 respondents • more attorneys with 5 years or less experienceFocus groups — 10 conducted
  • 4. Firm Composition/Women
  • 5. Firm Composition/Attorneys of Color
  • 6. Non Firm Composition/Women
  • 7. Recruitment of Women
  • 8. Recruitment of Attorneys of Color
  • 9. Firm Governance/Women
  • 10. Firm Governance/Attorneys of Color
  • 11. Key Committees/Attorneys of Color
  • 12. Firm Compensation/Women
  • 13. Non Firm Compensation/Women
  • 14. Promotion to Partnership/Women• 45% of lawyers eligible for equity partnership were female• Of those eligible, 44% were considered for equity partnership• Of those considered, 45% were made equity partners
  • 15. Promotion to Partnership/ Attorneys Of Color• 4% of lawyers eligible for equity partnership were of color• Of those eligible, 5% were considered for equity partnership• Of those considered, 7% of lawyers were made equity partners• No lawyers of color were eligible for non-equity partnership
  • 16. Promotion of Women/Non Firms• 59% of lawyers eligible for promotion to supervisory positions were women• Of those eligible, 55% were considered for promotion to supervisory positions• Of those eligible, 71% were promoted to supervisory positions
  • 17. Promotion of Attorneys of Color/Non Firms• 16% of lawyers eligible for promotion to supervisory positions were of color• Of those eligible, 18% of were considered for promotion to supervisory positions• Of those considered, 14% were promoted to supervisory positions
  • 18. Compensation Criteria/Firms• For associates the top criterion for setting compensation was billable hours• For equity/non-equity partners the top criterion for setting compensation was business generation
  • 19. Compensation Criteria/Non Firms• The top criteria for setting compensation at non firms for all attorneys were: – Performance evaluation results – Quality of work – Communication skills
  • 20. Work DistributionFirms• One quarter had formalized criteria for work distribution to associates• None had formalized criteria for work distribution to partnersNon Firms• Nearly half had formalized criteria for work distribution to attorneys with less than 5 years experience• Nearly one third had formalized criteria for work distribution to supervisory attorneys
  • 21. Performance EvaluationsFirms• All associates receive reviews• 32% of equity partners receive reviews• 21% of non equity partners receive reviewsNon Firms• All permanent attorneys receive reviews
  • 22. Perception of Bias
  • 23. Conclusion• Some progress• More to be done Work distribution Compensation Succession planning Unconscious bias
  • 24. Questions?
  • 25. 2011 Diversity Survey Update: Key Findings April 2012