How to Promote Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Legal Workplaces

Episode Notes

Transcript

JoAnn Hathaway:

Hello and welcome to another edition of the State Bar of Michigan’s On Balance Podcast on Legal Talk Network.

Molly Ranns:

I’m Molly Ranns.

JoAnn Hathaway:

And I’m JoAnn Hathaway. We are very pleased to have Gregory Conyers diversity Development program director at the State Bar of Michigan. Join us today as our podcast guest. Greg is dedicated to advancing diversity in the legal profession, working with law firms, bar associations and law schools to promote inclusivity and support for lawyers from diverse backgrounds, his efforts strengthen the pipeline to the profession and highlight successful diversity initiatives statewide. And with that, Greg, would you share some more information about yourself with our listeners please?

Gregory Conyers:

Certainly. Thanks Molly and JoAnn for having me appreciate the opportunity to talk about the great work that we’ve been doing at the state bar in this space. I started this work about 14 years ago to that I was the director of our justice initiatives work where we focused more broadly on a number of different justice initiatives, issues, did some learning around the country, went to some seminars, A, B, A and otherwise, and learned about sort of the context and contours of how the profession could really improve in terms of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Came back and talked to our then executive director and her response was, great, well, you have a new job title. And with that we started to focus very specifically on the need to make some improvements in the profession. And so that’s how I got started in this work and the work continues.

JoAnn Hathaway:

Excellent. Well, we’re so grateful to have you here today. I’ve had the pleasure of being able to work with Greg for the last many years. Greg, to start, could you give us a broad overview of what diversity, equity, and inclusion mean in the context of a law firm? So how each of these elements really contribute uniquely to the workplace?

Gregory Conyers:

Absolutely. So if you begin with the issue of diversity, it’s really I think important to remember that as a country we are becoming more diverse. And that has been the case now for a couple of decades. And in fact, there are places in the country where the so-called minority populations are in fact majority. And that really is something that we take a look at in terms of the profession and think about how the profession reflects the community that it serves. And so it’s important for us to consider what our profession looks like. This goes back to some task forces that were put in place by the Supreme Court back in the late eighties to take a temperature of our population here in Michigan regarding the justice system. And one of the things that became very clear was that people felt better about the outcomes that they received if they felt like they were heard.

And part of that feeling as though they were being heard had to do with who they saw on the other side of theBar. If they saw people who reflected them one way or another, who they thought they could be understood by, and that holds true regardless of the outcome. That is a place where a lot of the work was started in terms of race and gender specifically, there were two task force reports done by the State Bar of Michigan, and that really is an important aspect to consider is what the profession looks like with respect to equity. It really recognizes that everyone does not stand on the same footing or start from the same place when it comes to the profession. There are different accommodations needed to give people similar opportunities to succeed. And that is something that is I guess a little bit of a newer aspect to the work.

But the focus on equity has been over the last several years really elevated because of the understanding that there needs to be differences acknowledged with respect to inclusion, really it’s talking about how you honor all of the perspectives at the table. And the increased problem solving, which really is at the heart of the legal profession, is problem solving the increased opportunity to problem solve that you experience when you have diverse opinions around the table and those opinions are included. So with that, you take a look at the entire perspective of what it means to be focused on DEI. And I think it’s very important to acknowledge that it’s not an easy road. It’s not something that can be handled with a couple of trainings or a couple of discussions. And so it’s an ongoing opportunity to improve and that’s what we’ve been focused on at the state par.

Molly Ranns:

The legal profession has such a significant role in shaping society, and that makes DEI even more critical. From your perspective, why is it especially important in the legal field and what unique challenges and opportunities do law firms face in this area compared to other professions?

Gregory Conyers:

Again, I think that the primary concerns that we have are both the protection of the public and respect for the rule of law, and that really is fundamentally at the crux of the work that’s being done in this space. For law firms, it becomes very important because there is a demand oftentimes by their clients to see real opportunities for underrepresented populations. Again, if you look at the demographic information that we have that those firms are serving a diverse population as well as the companies that they’re working for are courting one way or another diverse populations. And so it’s very important again that they are meeting those expectations of their clients. It’s a very interesting situation in a law firm. There’s historically been barriers to the law profession that have been put in place, that kind of narrow opportunities for underrepresented folks in ways that are significantly different from the general population.

And there’s no surprise that the profession itself is skewed towards a certain demographic over time, and that has slowly changed. And so there are a number of opportunities that remain to make significant impact and to include more folks in the profession. Another real challenge is that there has always been this sort of what I call a myth of meritocracy, where the feeling is that everyone can succeed. Everyone has an opportunity to do well, and that opportunity is somehow equally obtainable and the facts and the data suggest otherwise. There are different opportunities that people have had over time based on demographics. And for instance, as an example, women have represented over 50% or at least 50% of the graduates in law school over a number of years, but they only represent 39% about within the context of the workforce. That number decreases significantly when you look at opportunities for leadership partner, and that’s just one demographic as an example.

But there are reasons for that. There are structural reasons that have been in place over time that are now being challenged by professionals who have understood the importance of having people at the table, firms that have followed the path to improving their own situations in that regard. And so I think those sort of structural barriers, not to understate how important it is for people to be good, but there are things in place that make it and sometimes distract people from being able to achieve. And so those are the kinds of things that good trainings are put in place to address.

JoAnn Hathaway:

I appreciate that example so much, Greg. I’m always really interested in doing research on wellbeing, looking at how many females graduate from law school yet how many are actually partners in firms. I appreciate you bringing that up. Another comparison as you’re talking, I’m thinking of my work as a clinician specializing in lawyer wellbeing. A lot of times people use wellbeing and wellness interchangeably, though there are some slight differences to those definitions. And so I’m wondering if you could talk about the differences between equity and equality because I think they mean different things, but I believe people maybe use them more interchangeably.

Gregory Conyers:

Absolutely. The case, Molly, something that comes to mind whenever I have this conversation is there’s an image that has floated around for quite some time of individuals behind a fence trying to look at a baseball game. And if you look at the individuals, each of them has different characteristics, physical and otherwise. And the first image is of all of them standing on the same ground trying to look over the fence and trying to observe the game. And you can see that some people are shorter and have a harder time taking a look. Some are taller, some have devices that they have to use wheelchairs and et cetera, and so they’re not able to see the game all in the same way. And the second image, of course, is having accommodations for those folks’ differences. So you have a hole in the fence where someone who’s shorter can see or a box to have someone be able to stand up to be able to see the game equally. And so that equity is what we are really trying to talk about when we say the word equity, it’s not equal, in other words, it’s not that everyone is at the exact same place. Equity is focused on how do you get people to be in a place where they can all have the same opportunities. And so I think that’s a very substantial difference because equity takes into account the accommodations that need to be made in order to get people to a certain place.

Molly Ranns:

Greg, talking about DEI isn’t always easy and there are a lot of misconceptions and resistance that firms might encounter. With your experience, what are some of the most common misunderstandings about DEI in the legal profession and how can law firms overcome them?

Gregory Conyers:

Well, you’re right, there are a lot of misconceptions, and I think I would say that one of the challenges in this particular time that we’re in are to articulate more carefully what in fact DEI is supposed to address and what kinds of things it is not doing. So for instance, there are some who are concerned that the focus of DEI efforts is to give people a spot that they’re not qualified for. I mentioned the issue of meritocracy. It is not the case that people are only hired or kept in firms based on merit alone. We know that people have different experiences, different relationships and different opportunities, and some of those are based on their demographic. And so that’s not something that we address by getting people who are less qualified. That’s not what the idea is. But that is a misconception that some folks have just sort of taking a look at the whole area.

And along with that, that you’re giving underrepresented people a chance to take a space away from the majority population. Again, never the intent or the desired outcome. What you’re trying to do, of course, is get the best people put into the best positions, but you are also trying to again, improve the profession as it relates to inclusion and underrepresented populations who therefore would make the profession more accessible to people who are looking to receive help from legal professionals that understand them and understand their perspectives. People misconceive that a meeting that we all have biases. And if you look at the science we do means that you’re being called a racist. And that is certainly not the case. In fact, if you look at the neuroscience of our brains, you’ll understand through the data that all of us are subject to tendencies that are based on not only who we are and how we’ve raised, but also innate characteristics of humans that have evolved over time, but still leave fragments of our real desire to be with people who are like us.

So overcoming some of those issues is a challenge. Some people perceive when there’s an opportunity or in some cases a mandatory reasoning to take training that is a punishment, that they’ve somehow done something wrong, which of course is not the case. Sometimes those things are put in place as a result of issues certainly, but all of us can fundamentally benefit from training and understanding both our responses and actions in terms of bias, but also the opportunities that exist when we do a better job of it being inclusive. Some people make the mistake that it’s a one and done. I mentioned that earlier. The best trainings are ongoing, and they give people opportunities to continue to learn, continue to improve. And so that becomes a culture as opposed to just one training, one opportunity. And along with that, of course, people sometimes think that the progress is going to be quick.

In other words, if you’ve identified the problem and you’ve agreed that there is a problem and you’ve taken some steps to address it, that there you are and you’ve now fixed the issue when again, it’s the ongoing nature of training and the opportunities to continue to improve that over time have shown themselves to be effective. We have a great trainer that we’ve used at the State Bar of Michigan for a number of our, both internally and externally, a number of our members. In fact, we’ve trained over 4,000 attorneys throughout the state of Michigan. One of her favorite places to spend time is to talk about the fact that when you’ve gone through her training, you take something called the IAT, which sort of makes a determination about some biases and uses some scientific methodology to do that. But you score really great after having taken her training. But a month or two later, if you haven’t done anything in that interim, your score goes down. And so just a way to illustrate the fact that all of us can benefit from great training. And so I think that it’s a very important aspect of this work to understand that it’s long-term, that it’s a commitment to change and that some of these, again, misconceptions are really based in not understanding the full breadth of what we’re trying to accomplish when we work on diversity, equity, and inclusion.

JoAnn Hathaway:

I love the mention of neuroscience. I think a lot of times lawyers do need to see statistics in black and white as thinkers necessarily rather than feelers. I did take her training when you brought her into theBar and I learned a lot as well, Greg, so I am appreciative of that. We are now going to take a short break from our conversation with Greg Conyers to thank our sponsors.

Molly Ranns:

Welcome back. We are thrilled to be here today with Greg Conyers talking about law firm diversity, equity, and inclusion and its importance in law firms.

JoAnn Hathaway:

Greg, for a firm just beginning to think about DEI, what are some foundational steps to build a genuinely inclusive and equitable culture?

Gregory Conyers:

It starts at the top. You really have to have the commitment from leadership as a beginning step, and that is the most determining factor of success, is having that kind of long-term commitment. Again, not relying on short of quick fixes to deal with the culture of an organization. And that takes a commitment of resources and time. You have to do what is necessary to provide support for the work in terms of resources and time. And then there’s research that needs to be done to understand the current culture. I think that none of us is probably exempt from feeling like, oh, this is maybe not affecting me personally. And I think that the work culture is fine when in fact that may not be everyone’s experience. And so understanding the culture that you’re trying to address is very important, and doing the research needed to be able to do that well is an important aspect as well.

And then there’s a lot of existing resources out there and there’s no need to reinvent the wheel as it were. When it comes to developing firms attack on their culture and trying to change, there’s lots of resources that can be tailored to specific firm cultures and specific issues that they’re trying to address. There’s organizations that are dedicated to doing that work and producing resources. theBar has a number of great resources that we have compiled on our website. We are always available to assist and direct people to the latest and greatest resources in this space. So it’s not something where you have to go it alone and create something out of whole cloth. There’s really a lot of work that’s been done in this space over time that has shown results. Going back to what the profession looks like, there’s been significant change over the years since I started working in this area, and certainly there’s a lot to be done, but there is no question as to whether or not working on this, doing the training and doing the hard lifting has an impact over time.

Molly Ranns:

Greg, it’s clear that a law firm’s culture has a huge impact on everything from say, employee satisfaction to client outcomes. So when it comes to DEI, how does a focus on these principles influence a law firm’s workplace culture? And what are some of the tangible benefits that firms see from fostering such an inclusive environment?

Gregory Conyers:

I’ll say that quite some time ago, the business case, if you will, for why DEI is important to law firms was made, and that’s been done over and over again. And sometimes it’s surprising that you have to go back and address that in some instances, but it really is about improved productivity. Creating a better culture means better output for organizations. And that’s been proven again and again by the data. You have improved retention. No company wants to continue to invest in employees that decide to leave, and there’s a hard amount of investment that’s put into a new employee and having that all go to waste because a person is not comfortable in the culture, certainly not where businesses want to find themselves. The same is true of law firms. And really when you think about it, the driver of change has been the law firm’s relationship with their corporate clients.

Way back in 2004, there was a call to action developed by a number of GCs, general counsel, rod Palmore and others. And those companies really took a look at the importance of diversity to them, to their consumers, and wanted to be certain that the law firms that they were working with were also focused on this important area. And so they made a call to action that insisted that there be some more attention paid to the diversity of the law firm as it relates to the work that was being done for the corporations. And so that’s a part of what has been the driving factor, is that the corporations that the law firms are working with as well as the clients are demanding that they have a more diverse and representative workforce. And that doesn’t mean just bringing people to the table that look differently, but it means giving them significant work and substantial opportunities to proceed just as others and the firm and to be able to bring home business just as others do in the firms.

And so that priority along with, again, the importance of the rule of law within communities and the importance of the protection of the public, those are the things that have driven the firms to improve their selves. The other part of that, of course, though, is the employees, as I said earlier, no one wants to put an investment in that doesn’t have a return because people are leaving. And in fact, just as in other businesses, people who are not satisfied with the culture tend to leave, that’s a real issue for the law firms, and they need to, of course address that in order to be successful.

JoAnn Hathaway:

Greg, as you’re talking, my clinical brain cannot stop thinking about the connection between DEI and employee wellbeing. It seems that this connection is profound, but also I guess mutually reinforcing when organizations prioritize DEI initiatives, it seems they create a culture where employees feel valued, they feel respected and included. Can you talk about how this connection works and how DEI initiatives contribute to improved mental and emotional health for those in the legal field?

Gregory Conyers:

Absolutely. I think that it’s surprise to your listeners that the legal field has a number of pressures and has in fact, as you know, Molly, some of the worst statistics when it comes to wellbeing of the professionals. That is exacerbated when you have people who are in a culture within a firm or otherwise, where they feel that they’re not being heard, they feel that they’re not respected. And we know that, again, from the data and the research, that not only is there a mental component to this, there’s in fact a physical component to people who are, for instance, subject to microaggressions where they are not. When people are saying things that are inappropriate, there’s no consequence for that kind of behavior, or there are other inappropriate things happening at the workplace. These are things that take a toll on all of us mentally and physically, but we know that with underrepresented populations that there’s a disparate impact, and that disparate impact is then sometimes even further down the line in terms of resources felt.

And then I would add to that some communities discussing things like mental health, still in some ways taboo and not really well articulated among those populations. And so I think you have a confluence of things that happen that unfortunately sometimes result in some of the things that you see, Molly, whether it’s substance abuse issues or it’s the physical health issues, the mental health issues, all of those things. People are more at risk to be impacted by those things and an unfriendly and unwelcoming environment, workplace culture. And again, unfortunately, there’s a disparate impact to people from certain underrepresented populations. And so it’s really incumbent upon the workplace where we spend most of our lives to be understanding about the scenarios that are possible and trying to find solutions, provide training, provide opportunities, and really address the issues that we all are aware of in terms of health, mental, physical, head on, and not to hide those things. Because at the end of the day, it does impact productivity. It does impact people’s ability to come to work and be their best selves.

Molly Ranns:

Greg, it seems like today’s clients are more discerning than ever, and many are intentionally choosing firms that reflect their own values. And this would include a commitment to diversity and inclusion, such as we’re talking about. So how can law firms align with these expectations and what role does DEI play in building and maintaining those strong client relationships?

Gregory Conyers:

Well, as I alluded to earlier, there’s a number of resources that are in existence that can be helpful to firms. One that stands out in my mind is there’s an organization called Diversity Lab, and they have over the last several years put together a certification program known as Mansfield Certification. If you’re familiar at all with the NFL and the Rooney Rule, this is something that it was based on, and it really is about trying to meet certain benchmarks in terms of making certain that jobs and opportunities are available to underrepresented groups. And so over time, that organization has provided this Mansfield certification all across the country. And in fact, I think they’re up to about 300 or so different law firms across the country, several of which are in Michigan as a matter of fact. And what that is is again, they’ve developed a number of methods, tools, resources, and benchmarks to try and get law firms up to speed and have them be able to really full throated support DEI efforts, but also do the work and have a structure by which to accomplish the things that we all agree are important with that.

And so I think that’s one example. And there are certainly other kinds of tools and resources that are available to firms. So again, you don’t have to start from ground zero when you’re trying to address your workplace culture. And there are other things, even outside of the legal profession that have been developed. We know that corporations, I don’t think it’s surprising to anyone have been developing ways to address this for a long time, primarily because they have consumers to sell to. They don’t want to make that an opportunity that they miss. And so they’ve been working on these issues outside of the legal profession for many, many years. And I think that it’s important to identify that while the conversations have changed over time, and there’s been ebbs and flows of support for the words and the narratives around this space, there’s two things that remain clear. One is, again, the demographics of the population are changing, and two, it benefits businesses including law firms to be serving the clients in the communities that they are involved in. And the best way to do that is to be representative of those groups. And so I think lots of work has been done in this area to address culture, to improve firms ability to be inclusive. And so that’s where a law firm needs to start if they haven’t already started. They need to continue to grow and learn because it’s an evolving topic.

JoAnn Hathaway:

And I think like wellness or wellbeing, it’s not something you can do once and just check a box on and say, oh, we’ve talked about DEI done, but something that is ongoing. Can you talk a little bit about some effective ways for firms to really integrate DEI into their hiring, into their training and leadership development processes? How can these efforts help firms attract and retain that top talent?

Gregory Conyers:

Well, I think it starts right at the beginning when a firm is involved in trying to hire, there are some best practices with respect to blind hiring practices in terms of the information that you receive as you go through the process about particular individuals. A lot of organizations have taken to erasing the name from people’s applications because associations with race and gender and other things happen when you know a person’s name, oppression is developed and sometimes that impacts how you go forward. There’s opportunities all along the way to be supportive as you bring people into your firm culture. Training opportunities, as we’ve mentioned, are very important mentoring opportunities that meet associates at the door, but also meets them where they are. We know that the workforce has changed over time, and everyone’s opportunities are impacted by their need to be a part of the rest of their lives.

And so there’s been lots of data compiled about what happens when, for instance, men and women are in the workplace and the people who are making the decisions about who’s getting the work in a law firm are all going out to play golf. And some folks are not able to do that either because they don’t play golf or because they have family obligations after work or what have you. And so there’s accommodations that again, need to be considered when we’re talking about being an inclusive environment and not just having an environment where only a certain group of individuals are able to succeed. So mentoring and meeting associates where they are is very important. It’s also important the data suggests that law firms be flexible in terms of what they’re looking for from perspective hires, and that has to go back to issues of grade point and law school that if you look at the data and then the analysis over time, there’s been an understanding created that just because someone comes from a particular law school and has a particular grade point average does not make them necessarily their best fit for any individual firm or position.

There’s lots of factors that need to be considered. Again, there’s lots of data and information talking about how this plays out in the workplace, but there’s really no substitute for having the leadership at the top, understanding the importance of creating a good work environment and the importance of inclusion and how that in and of itself is going to bring people to the table who many of whom have an expectation that firms have started to address these issues. And so the way to address those issues, of course, is to have an ongoing conversation about that with your people who are working for you and with you. It’s something that’s evolving. The definition of diversity is evolving over time, and with that, all of us are still learning about how to be inclusive and still learning what it means to create a workplace culture that’s positive and welcoming to all of those who are trying to participate.

Molly Ranns:

This has been such important and beneficial information, Greg, although it does look like we’ve come to the end of our show, we’d like to thank our guest today, Greg Conyers, for a wonderful program.

Gregory Conyers:

Well, thank you so much for having me. I really appreciate the opportunity. It’s a place where we continue to do work at the state bar, as you know, but it’s a place, I think, where society as a whole continues to do things that are important to make inclusive decision-making a part of the way we all operate.

JoAnn Hathaway:

Greg, you’ve shared some really great information today. If our guests would like to follow up with you with regard to anything you’ve shared or if they have other questions, what’s the best way for them to do so?

Gregory Conyers:

The best way to contact me is through my email, the State Bar of Michigan, which is G [email protected].

JoAnn Hathaway:

Thank you again for being with us today, Greg.

Gregory Conyers:

Thanks so much for having me. I appreciate the opportunity.

JoAnn Hathaway:

This has been another edition of the State Bar of Michigan’s On Balance Podcast. I’m JoAnn Hathaway.

Molly Ranns:

And I’m Molly Ranns. Until next time, thank you for listening.

Announcer:

Thank you for listening to the State Bar of Michigan On Balance Podcast, brought to you by the State Bar of Michigan, and produced by the broadcast professionals at Legal Talk Network. If you’d like more information about today’s show, please visit legal talk network.com, subscribe via Apple Podcasts and RSS, find the State Bar of Michigan and Legal Talk Network on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, or download Legal Talk Network’s free app in Google Play at iTunes. The views expressed by the participants of this program are their own and do not represent the views of, nor are they endorsed by Legal Talk Network or the State Bar of Michigan or their respective officers, directors, employees, agents, representatives, shareholders, and subsidiaries. None of the content should be considered legal advice. As always, consult a lawyer.