Forums

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I have plenty of thoughts. It's just that this profession is going nowhere--at least at firms. And it's because firms want it that way.

In house jobs are really the only viable route for black attorneys. The way firms are structured and what they value means that black people will make only the slowest of steps toward progress. And what is the most annoying is that firms talk all that shit about wanting to be diverse but finding no candidates(!), but they consistently ignore the problem and/or shoo it off on the black associates and partners to solve when they are the fucking issue.

Firms value business. Not surprising. But the path to business is either through family and friends connections, hustling, or being cultivated/inheriting/working on the firm's institutional business.

Obviously given the state of our country and the place black people occupy in it, it is exceedingly rare for black attorneys to have access to the types of connections which yield business.

Hustling is a fucking myth. We all know someone who we thought was out there networking and built a practice through hard work and effort, but it always turns out that whatever they bring in was through a relationship they have with a family member or friend from fucking high school or college (or one degree of separation from that scenario). That puts us back in the first bucket. (And please spare me the "But I know a guy who..." stories. I'm a corporate finance attorney. I inherited my main client and was lucky to do so. If you think I can go out there, meet decision makers at financial institutions, pitch them, woo them, whatever, and build a client base on my brains and hustle, you're delusional. I've done it all and the business goes to long-standing relationships amongst older white men. Period. End of story.)

So what's left? Working on institutional clients, being cultivated, and inheriting business. This is where firms should be doing most of their work. But the people with the business are not interested in bringing along black associates (and if you're a black woman, you might as well get out before your 4th year, because you have no chance). And because of how firms are run--management is meaningless because all that matters is a big book--no one with business is ever held to account on how they pick who gets the work and who gets sponsored. If firms were smart, they would make people who do the work well, but who don't have the client connections to bring in business partners too. But firms aren't smart. They're greedy and selfish. That's the business model. Black people know there's no place in the partnership ranks for them by their second year. So they flee.

So minority talent goes in house, where it's valued. And because companies have a diverse client base, they actively look to diversify their legal departments at much higher rates than firms. We are headed to a place where companies are starting to push firms to hire, retain, and promote diverse talent, but there is only so much pressure that can be exerted. I know for a fact that firms don't get business because they aren't diverse enough and they don't even know when it happens. And when you tell them, they don't believe it, don't want to believe it, or don't care because it doesn't affect their personal book (which is built on relationships between white men who don't give a fuck).

So, what are the solutions? Here are a few:

• Have a path to partnership for talented attorneys who don't have a book of business
• Look for talent in places you don't normally look (like night school)
• Raid companies for their in house talent and make strong partnership offers
• Fix the rampant bias at large law firms when it comes to who gets work and who gets brought along

Sure, there's been some progress. But I'm not sure anyone in this profession should be patting themselves on the back. Increased numbers of law school students is great, but is that really progress? Over the course of 40 years, law schools now accept applicants without actively discriminating against them such that classes represent real world demographics when it comes to women?

I see you've listed a bunch of anecdotal evidence supporting the "You've come a long way, baby" narrative. And I'm not denying that, when it comes to women, there have been some improvements. But if law school classes are now more female than male, then why is it that women only make up 35% of lawyers at law firms? And when it comes to who is actually making the money, women still only reflect 20% of law firm equity (and that hasn't changed much in awhile). Progress is stagnant and it's going to be for quite some time.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/24/b...-partners.html

TM

First, thank you. This is really helpful stuff for thinking about and acting on.

I want to weigh in with some thoughts on "being cultivated" because it's something I've been thinking about and working on for a long time. I've tried to cultivate a lot of diverse associates over the years, as a partner at three different firms and with varying degrees of success, and one really big issue for me is that there are a lot of barriers put up when you are mentoring someone of color or a woman that are not there when mentoring white men. If I give some constructive criticism to a woman or minority (especially a minority who is black), something that is important for their development, it gets picked up and repeated over and over again. I'm reminded I said they needed to be more detail oriented, or needed to slow down a bit and think harder before they jump in, and I'm sometimes reminded of that for years after making the comment. As a result I've become very guarded in my reviews. On the other hand, if I say something positive, it gets forgotten quickly by many people unless I repeat it constantly. Also, minority candidates get criticized by people they don't work for much more than white candidates. Criticize someone who is black, just a little, and some old white guy in the room will give you an Amen, even if he's barely nodded hello to them.

I can quantify some of this. I had a top notch black associate who was bringing in north of $100K as a fifth year and bringing it in from top of the line clients with huge growth potential. A star. His work generation was regularly "put in context" in reviews. Things like people saying, Well, it's a start, but we can't tell yet if he can expand the relationships, he needs to defer more to partners brought in and they should run the matters, etc. etc. On the other hand, I regularly see more senior associates bringing in their first $20K matter getting all kinds of praise, credit and mentoring, even when it is commodity work sent in by some friend of the family. (This particular guy has since been recruited from me by a top 20 national firm, but I remain bitter.)

All this has led me to believe that finding ways to create consistent standards is very important to the cultivation effort. I know we've also got to change the attitudes of some white men, especially some of the liberals who should know better, but in the meantime imposing standards that holds every mediocre white boy to the same standards the old white guys hold women and non-white candidates to seems to be one way to even the playing field.