Sage survey presentation

703 views

Published on

Published in: Career, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
703
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
429
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Sage survey presentation

  1. 1. 2011 Diversity Survey Update: Key Findings * Presented by: Leslie M. Altman * Source 2011 MSBA Diversity Survey UpdateMay 2012
  2. 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. 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. 4. Firm Composition/Women
  5. 5. Firm Composition/Attorneys of Color
  6. 6. Non Firm Composition/Women
  7. 7. Recruitment of Women
  8. 8. Recruitment of Attorneys of Color
  9. 9. Firm Governance/Women
  10. 10. Firm Governance/Attorneys of Color
  11. 11. Key Committees/Attorneys of Color
  12. 12. Firm Compensation/Women
  13. 13. Non Firm Compensation/Women
  14. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 22. Perception of Bias
  23. 23. Conclusion• Some progress• More to be done Work distribution Compensation Succession planning Unconscious bias
  24. 24. Questions?
  25. 25. 2011 Diversity Survey Update: Key Findings April 2012

×