By now you probably have heard about the recent survey results in the Yale Law Women report entitled Yale Law School Faculty and Students Speak Up About Gender:  Ten Years Later.   Reported there, among other things, is the finding that women law students are not speaking up as much in class as their male counterparts.  This has been the subject of a lot of “buzz” lately, and some commenters find these results unfortunate and of concern.  I am not one of them.   I find it typical.  It is just exactly what I would expect women to do—and that is not a bad thing in that setting.  In that setting is the key.  Here is why.

Women tend to be very methodical and strategic in law school.  The women law students I knew in the day were content to sit back and listen to find out which other students were prepared for class, which ones spoke intelligently when called upon, and, as a result, which ones would make good study partners.  In fact, most of the young women I can remember, who had their wits about them, would not be caught dead with their hands in the air all of the time just to hear themselves talk.  Most of us sat in the back of the classroom and did not attempt to get the attention of the professor.  I think it just did not matter that much to women then, and maybe it does not now.  I do not think it is because they are afraid to speak up, unless they are belittled and harassed by the males in the class or the professors, and that is another matter entirely.

It is not speaking up in law school that I am worried about.  It is speaking up once you land the dream job and at a time when having opinions and answering questions with a strong voice and in a convincing manner is more important than a check mark on a professor’s attendance sheet that indicates you answered in a way that did not embarrass yourself.

Public speaking and advocacy is difficult, however, and law school does not teach you much about it beyond the requisite Moot Court exercise, unless you pursue an appellate or trial practice clinic.  Fortunately for you, my friend Jezra Kaye of Speak Up For Success is at the ready to help you.

Jezra is a consultant to law firms and other businesses on public speaking, and she also is a woman of many other talents.  Her recent newsletter describes her experience as a jazz singer, and the overlap between jazz singing—yes, jazz singing— and public speaking.  Here are a few hints on public speaking from Jezra that may be helpful to you.

Using the right words is not that important.  You need to focus on ideas, and the words will come.  Then you need to tune into your natural speaking rhythm—the one that you use when you are in relaxed conversation.  That is the rhythm that you are comfortable with and the one that will be most successful for you in public speaking.

Open your mouth.  This is no time for your introverted self.  Your words and your rhythm will not count for much if you are not heard.  And, you do not want to incur the wrath of the judge because he or she cannot hear you.  Judges tend to lose patience fast and revert to uncomplimentary monologue under those circumstances.

And, practice, practice, practice.  You never can practice enough.  This one really resonates with me.  I do a lot of public speaking, and I over prepare for every speech I give.  In fact, my best audience was my beloved English Springer Spaniel, Bailey, who listened to me practice my speeches endlessly until he died several years ago.  He never complained of boredom, and he always wagged his tail at the end of the speech.  I took that to be applause and loved  him for it.  Preparing for speeches is not as much fun any more without Bailey, but I know it is necessary.  It may be time for another dog in my life.

To read more about Jezra Kaye’s Speak Up For Success project and to sign up for her newsletters, go to www.JezraKaye.com or www.speakupforsuccess.com.  You will also be able to buy her recently-released novel there.  I told you she was a woman of many talents……….

Here’s something a little different today.  I have been thinking………about the Empire State Building and about young women lawyers.  What a combo!

I love the Empire State Building.  My daughter had a clear view of it from her apartment building across the Hudson River once upon a time, and I never tired of admiring the majestic spire.  So, when I saw an article on the recent renovation and retrofitting of the Empire State Building in the on-line Harvard Magazine, I just had to read it.  What I discovered was not only an interesting business story but also a lesson for law firms.  Here’s why.

The Harvard Magazine article described how Anthony Malkin, a Harvard Business School grad, and his family, owners of the Empire State Building, recently decided on a “green”—as in environmentally responsible—retrofit for the grand old building in Manhattan.  The Malkin family had made a choice years earlier to undertake massive renovations rather than sell the building, and they also decided that they would make the building energy efficient and environmentally-friendly in the process.

That’s a lot to take on, especially when you are talking about one of the nation’s best known and most popular landmarks, and all eyes are on the project.  In addition to this project, the Malkins also created projects that took the “green” concepts of retrofitting buildings onto the world stage, to places like Melbourne, London and Beijing.  They were not shy about a cutting-edge business concept that they knew made sound business sense.

If Anthony Malkin and his family sound like bleeding heart do-gooders, that would be a misconception.  Responsible, yes.  Do-gooder without an eye on the bottom line, not so much.  What I learned was that the Malkins just see the bottom line a little differently—perhaps a little more clearly—than others.  They see it creatively.  Instead of spending money in the traditional way, because that is how it has always been done, they seek out innovative solutions so that the same amount of money can be spent more intelligently and with longer-lasting and better results.  According to Anthony Malkin, “Energy efficiency is not something you add, it is something you build in.”

The rest of the story is history.  The Empire State Building is now all “green,” and the energy efficient retrofits are on a projected course to pay premiums in terms of value to the building and the investors.  Energy, and therefore value, is not escaping out the windows and doors of the Empire State Building anymore.

So back to law firms.  What do they have in common with the Malkins and all this green and energy efficient stuff?  A lot, I think.  Isn’t the Malkin’s approach to the Empire State Building retrofit the same one that law firms should be taking to retain talent and prevent value from slipping away?  Shouldn’t law firms consider the economic incentives to building in protections for the future rather than simply adding a little here and a little there and hope that it provides the appearance of tackling the issue.

In really tackling the issue and building in solutions, law firms need to add up the costs of associate attrition and understand just how much valuable experience and talent is unnecessarily leaving law firms, just as the costly heating and cooling was leaking out the windows and doors of the Empire State Building until the Malkins got smart.  Law firms should be dialing up the creativity to find ways to make difficult situations work for male and female attorneys alike —- so that the law firms can retain value and not lose it to the competition or to the unemployment scrolls.

Just as the Malkins had to project future profits and make it through the lean times during the expensive retrofit, law firms must take the long view and understand that most lawyers, and especially women lawyers, will work hard for employers that genuinely care about the careers and professional futures of those young lawyers and help them through the difficult work-life years.

How can law firms show they care?  Let me count the ways.  Good mentoring programs.  Quality work for lawyers who choose non-partnership tracks; Diversity programs and Women’s Initiatives, which the firm commits resources to and which provide helpful career guidance.  Workshops on developing clients and effective networking skills that do not always come as naturally to women.  Respect in the workplace, regardless of whether the lawyer is part-time, full-time, flex-time or some other alternative work program.  And more.

If a businessman like Anthony Malkin can do it so well, so can the lawyers.  Law firms need economic incentives just like the Malkins did, and adding up the numbers incident to attrition will demonstrate that firms lose upwards to $500,000 for every departing senior level associate when all the costs are added up.  That is not good business.

So, it takes a Harvard-educated businessman to teach the lawyers?  Whatever works.