Career advancement is often a challenge for women lawyers. Although laws prohibit gender inequality in the workplace and policies for gender equity have been adopted by law employers, much of the advancement challenge for women is up to them to solve.

The truth underlying the challenge is that career advancement is much harder for most women than for most men, and that certainly is true in the law profession. If it were not true, the percentage of female equity partners would far surpass the 20% that it is today and has been for awhile. While it also is true that some of that low percentage is the result of the choices that women lawyers make in pursuit of work-life balance, there are other factors at work in limiting advancement opportunities for women lawyers.

Some of the struggles for women are laid out in the book How Women Rise by Marshall Goldsmith and Sally Helgesen. Topics explored there include:

• Reluctance to claim achievements;
• Expecting others to notice and reward contributions;
• Building rather than leveraging relationships;
• Failing to enlist allies;
• Putting a job before a career plan;
• Demanding perfection; and
• Placing too much value on the desire to please.

All of these topics are worth considering in formulating a career plan. All of them can stand in the way of career advancement, and all of them can be painful to address. But you have to do it because no one is going to do it for you. Although a really effective mentor can help you think through some of these issues, you have to do the heavy lifting.

But there is another challenge that is so critical that it makes some of the others pale by comparison because it is so hard to overcome. My friend Andie Kramer and her husband and co-author Al Harris, two lawyers in Chicago, have addressed this problem in their book Breaking Through Bias. In that book and in their blogs at andieandal.com, they discuss how women seeking to advance in traditionally male fields, especially, face two particular types of biases, negative bias and agentic bias.

Negative bias for women derives from traditional feminine stereotypes that a woman is or should be “communal,” meaning warm, caring and gentle. Such women are seen as pleasant but unsuited for jobs requiring competence, competitiveness and authority.

Even more important, if a woman violates those traditional female stereotypes and behaves with authority, competence and independence, she is likely to be seen as aggressive, abrasive and bossy. And we all know what other “B word” will be ascribed to her then. This is called agentic bias and it comes with some harsh realities.

Andie and Al call dealing with these biases and their realities the Goldilocks Dilemma. Not too soft, but not too hard. Not too hot, but not too cold. And the double bind created by the intersection of negative and agentic biases is one you need to understand. Without understanding it, you will be unnecessarily handicapped in your efforts toward advancement and leadership.

Earlier today I presented a Webinar for Busy Lawyers. The format of this webinar series is 20 to 30 minutes of remarks plus Q and A. I was pleased to get so many questions at the end and to feel the enthusiasm from the moderator and the attendees. We could have taken more questions, but there just was not time. Those busy lawyers needed to get back to work!

The topic was “What Millennial Lawyers Want,” and the webinar was directed at millennial lawyers and the senior lawyers who lead them. It is always an interesting topic, and one that I love to present. My remarks began with research about millennials in general. How millennials were raised, what social issues affected them during those formative years, and what values they acquired early on is the only logical starting point for a discussion about millennial lawyers. After that, we moved on to the millennial lawyers in particular, and the generational divide that exists between them and more seasoned lawyers. I shared recent developments at law firms, where the issues are being effectively addressed, and other information about mentoring, effective communication, the special challenges for women lawyers, and the elements of a shared solution for the dilemma posed by the generational divide … and much, much more.

Here is a link so that you can enjoy listening to the webinar and seeing the Power Point on your own time:  https://www.masslomap.org/what-millennial-lawyers-want-and-how-to-effectively-lead-them-webinar/

Thank you to the webinar hosts and to all of you who submitted questions. It was a pleasure speaking to you!

I hear it all the time from our newest generation of lawyers. “I work for a jerk.” “I can’t please my supervisor with ANYTHING I do.” “Everything has to be PERFECT. Nothing else matters,” and “This guy thrives on my weaknesses and failures.”

According to a recent article, there are some tell-tale signs that, indeed, your boss may be a jerk. A brilliant jerk at that, but, nonetheless, a certifiable jerk.

So what does it take for a hardworking and dedicated boss to become a jerk? Here is how it is explained in the article:

A brilliant but abrasive leader is extremely talented but is driven to gain recognition above all else. They are exceptionally intelligent, but they use that intelligence for their own professional benefit rather than in the best interest of the company. … They are blinded to the costs their behavior has for individuals, teams, and the organization as a whole. They can destroy people’s self-confidence and inflict serious, lasting damage on their company. This toxic environment erodes morale and causes turnover to spike.

Pretty harsh but probably well-deserved. Even though it may be difficult to be a manager — and I know from personal experience that it is — that is no excuse for the kind of self-centered and destructive behavior described above. And that kind of behavior needs to be called out and avoided at all costs.

So beware of these bad managers. Look for the following characteristics:

• Lack of empathy;

• Volatile and manipulative behavior;

• Perfectionism, including setting unrealistic standards and deadlines for themselves and others;

• Difficulty with personal relationships, including low emotional IQs and trouble dealing with individual weaknesses; and

• Fear of failure and belief that their leadership is always being challenged and judged by the failures of their direct reports.

And commit the following words to memory:

Abrasive leaders can be incredibly charismatic, especially to clients. Due to their razor-sharp intelligence, they have strong powers of persuasion. But they also create a culture of fear that robs employees of their voice and deadens creativity.

Don’t be robbed. Leaders with these kinds of negative characteristics do not change. But you can. You can change departments or change employers. Anything less is self torture.

And you deserve more.

It is the height of the political season, and you may be a person who feels the need to share your political views in the office. But, don’t listen to Nike on this one. No. No. No. Halt. Desist. Freeze. Just don’t do it.

This is especially good advice after the debacle of the first presidential debate last week. Whatever side you were on, it is no exaggeration to say that it was a debacle. It was a shipwreck. It was a dumpster fire. If you watched all 90 minutes of it, you probably felt as brain dead as I did afterward. But you may want to stifle yourself and keep your thoughts to yourself in the office setting. Here’s why.

It can be very risky discussing politics with colleagues. Although you may think you know how they trend on the political spectrum, you should err on the side of caution. Even if their opinions may be similar to yours, similar and the same can be light years apart.

When I was growing up in a small town in the Midwest, my family had a rule. You don’t discuss politics and religion outside the nuclear family. Even inside the nuclear family it could get very interesting and even a little ugly because my parents were educated and opinionated people who did not always agree. I think that they cancelled each other’s votes out on a regular basis, and don’t get me started on religion. My Mom was a devoted church goer, and my Dad was counsel to the church board and taught Sunday School. But he took his kids hiking and bird watching during many a church service ‘cuz I’m pretty sure he was an agnostic!

A recent article by Joel Patterson, a ForbesBook author, entitled “How To Prevent Political Discussions From Polarizing Your Workplace” suggests the following — with a little twist on those themes from yours truly.

Remember the Core Values of your Workplace. In a law firm, those core values should include respect for others and also for their opinions. If that is your guide star for any political discussions you think you must have, you may survive without major interpersonal upheavals. But, it is still risky. Once you introduce the subject, you may have to pivot and dodge when the road gets bumpy. Some people find that very hard.

Be Aware That You Will Be Judged By Your Behavior. If you disrupt the workplace with your strong opinions, you will be judged. Take that to the bank. Any time you make others feel uncomfortable, they will judge you. Even if some of your colleagues agree with your opinions, those same colleagues will judge you for the disruption. It is a no-win situation.

Practice the Fine Art of De-escalation. Let’s assume that you have taken the leap into the unknown and are in a full-blown workplace discussion of politics AND that it gets heated and a bit out of control. How you handle yourself at that point could be very important to your professional future. All eyes will be on you. Will you be cool and agree to disagree? Or will you pour gasoline on the flames? Hard to know until you are in the thick of it. Again, very risky.

If you are not convinced by now that “Just don’t do it” is the right approach to political discussions in the workplace, I can’t help you. You are helpless and on your own.

I just hope you make it through to the end of the year — because that may be how long it takes to sort out the mess we are in right now.