I have written on this subject before, and I return to it because I am hearing more and more chatter about it lately. Much of the conversation is about advancing women to corporate boards. In the last few years, countries all over the globe have passed laws mandating quotas for female participation on corporate boards. Norway led the pack, imposing a quota of 40%, followed by France, Ireland and Spain. The Netherlands and Malaysia chose quotas of 30%, and Australia, Britain and Sweden are seriously considering quotas and threatening legislation unless companies voluntarily comply with increasing the number of corporate board seats for women.
Although the trend started with businesses, it also is an issue in law firms. However, I am not a fan of quotas for advancement of women in law firms, and nothing I have read has changed my mind from the time that I first addressed the subject in 2012. Here’s what I said then and what I continue to believe:
It seems to me that women lawyers want to get where they need to go by being qualified and being recognized for their merit. History shows us that quotas cause more resentment than respect, and such a result would be regrettable. It does not matter how high you rise if you are not taken seriously when you get there.
I think imposing quotas for the advancement of women, especially in the law profession, is a slippery slope, and I pay close attention to comments suggesting that advancing women to partnership and management positions in law firms before they are experienced enough for the responsibilities of those positions will lead to perceptions that the women are mere “window dressing in rooms full of experienced and powerful men” and the suggestion that advancing women in this shortcut manner will not result in a long term solution.
I also fear that quotas will carry the implication that women lawyers cannot succeed on their own. We can, and we will. However, that does not mean that we do not need help, but I am not convinced that quotas is the help we need. It seems that some others agree.
A recent Lawyers Weekly article reported on the situation in Australia where a majority of managing partners believe the best way to increase the number of women in leadership roles is to focus on retaining female lawyers, not through imposition of quotas. In the underlying survey, 34 managing partners at major Australian firms were asked how firms could achieve a higher percentage of women in partner roles.
Seventy percent of responding law firm managing partners suggested the best option for firms was to “ensure policies below partner level retain the best female talent.” Only 6.7 percent of those responding favored quotas, 10 percent were in favor of unconscious bias training for law firm partners, and a little over 13 percent suggested aspirational targets rather than strict quotas.
The majority of respondents emphasized the need to engage with female partners and associates to develop programs and support structures that address the issues that cause female lawyers to either leave firms prior to promotion to partnership or block the conventional pathways to partnership. Another focus among the respondents was on reintegration of women after maternity leave as an important consideration in significantly changing the percentage of female partners.
What do you think? Are quotas the answer to advancing women in the profession of law? Let me hear from you.
