On Sunday, Susan Grigsby posted a powerful and disturbing diary titled "Ignorant Sluts, Work Wives, and Other Names for Women Lawyers". In essence, 30 years after a great upsurge in women attending law school, the treatment of women in the legal profession is abysmal. Susan cited many instances of sexism, patronizing and insulting behavior from male colleagues and cringe-worthy comments from judges. The statistics she cited were compelling. Even though women represent roughly half of law school grads, they only represent 16% of equity partners at law firms For the uninitiated, an equity partner typically is a true partner, owning shares in the firm entitling them to profits and real votes in the firm's operations. Non-equity partners are afforded the title of partner essentially as a promotion. Non equity partners make more money than associates (a law firm's youngest cohort), but are typically not owners. While becoming a non-equity partner is a milestone (and lucrative), becoming an equity partner is the real prize.
I wrote a long comment sharing my experiences and perspective as a male equity partner who is mentoring two young women partners at my 150 lawyer firm. Kossack SpamNunn suggested that I turn my comment into a diary, so here goes. Let me give one caveat about my perspective. The study that Susan relied on came from American Lawyer and sampled almost exclusively from "Biglaw" firms, namely the 200 largest firms in the US. My firm, at 150 lawyers is considered a mid-sized firm and our existence is much more "Willie Loman"-like than the rarefied existence at Biglaw. Our partners are paid well but not at the same level as those quoted in the American Lawyer article. That said, we are facing the same struggles in advancing women to equity partner rolls. I know that we have concerted efforts to do so. We will see how those efforts pay off during the next few years.
Law firms award equity partnerships to lawyers who originate business (ie, bring in and keep new clients) or who have indispensable specialties (eg, Supreme court litigator, arcane tax law expert, intellectual property guru) that enable the selling lawyers at the firm to land clients based on those unique needs. Sexism exists and is a fact of life, though it has been receding (too slowly, but receding nonetheless) over the 30 plus years I have been practicing.
In my sphere, a woman who controls a substantial portfolio of business today ($1million in annual billings and up) will be made an equity partner. If she is not made equity she can take that portfolio down the street and another law firm will make her an equity partner -- a lateral move. My firm has recruited two such women in the last two years not because they were women, but because they had business. All firms covet new business and no one wants to let good business go out the door. In the midsize and small firm worlds, client relationships tend to be more individually directed, rather than tied to the institution as they are at Biglaw. Thus business follows the lawyer. Firms value the lawyer based on her "portable" business.
Most importantly the lawyer with business she controls will be in control of her destiny. She won't care if someone thinks she's too aggressive or if she should wear higher heels; her client following will command respect for her and security. And I'm not talking about a lawyer (woman or man) who works on matters totaling $1mm or more per year, but a lawyer who has client relationships that bring in that kind of revenue, regardless whether the business getter works on them or not. Worker bees frequently do not make equity partners, unless they are indispensable specialists. A business litigator or a corporate generalist is not such a specialist; they are replaceable. A lawyer with a client following, however, is someone the law firm wants to keep.
Excellent work is not a guarantee of equity partnership. In fact many equity partners are not excellent lawyers. They are sales-people. And the decision makers at most clients are men. They profess neutrality but we know that's not the case. I'm a man and it took me 22 years of, in essence, pounding the pavement with a smile and a shoeshine, cultivating clients to generate the type of business that enabled me to become an equity partner. If I was a woman, I am certain it would have taken longer.
At my mid-size firm (150 lawyers, not Biglaw) I am mentoring 2 women non-equity partners trying to cultivate their business development skills so that they can become owners some day. They face many challenges -- family/work life balance is a fact of life (see below), old boy networks, lack of old girl networks -- but there are many opportunities. One key quality to cultivating business is emotional intelligence, a psychology concept that goes a long way toward explaining success in life and business. Women have a better aptitude for EQ than men do -- qualities such as the ability to listen, empathy, understanding people's problems, communicating, making an authentic connection. Men boast, women listen. Bluster only gets you so far, but letting a client know that you understand his/her problems is the basis for a long term business relationship. I like to listen and I'm always trying to improve my communications skills. I'm teaching that to my mentees.
But that's only part of the puzzle. I don't play golf, but I do entertain. Our firm has a budget for all partners (owners and non-owners) to do that - dinners, concerts, events, and, yes, golf. I take my best client and his wife to a major concert every year -- Paul McCartney last year, U2 this year. But my kids are in college so my schedule is flexible; my mentees have nannies who are on tight schedules - it's tough to spontaneously celebrate a success with a client over drinks, but often that's the moment that solidifies a relationship. But you can plan longer term (dinner a week from now) and make suitable baby-sitting arrangements.
At bigger firms long hours and 24/7 demands are common. If you're at that level of the profession, you may want to have live in help because you can afford it. A friend of mine started her own law firm (now 7 lawyers) and is very successful. Her kids are just over 10 and she has full time help. Sacrificing a personal life is a price everyone pays. Our firm is not that intense but I missed plenty of soccer games and teacher conferences. The good news is that at a certain level these are rich people's problems. If you're in that kind of demand, you're making a real good salary and can afford to hire people to help you. The bottom line is servicing the client. A client who understands that you are going the extra mile will appreciate it (mostly but some just expect it) and that will build loyalty.
But if you choose to walk away to be with your family (as the American Lawyer article discussed) that's fine too. Life is a journey and you can come back to practicing law at any time on your own terms. A friend of mine stopped practicing for 15 years, raised her family and ran a small business in her suburb. She re-entered law practice at age 44 and is doing just fine 15 years later in a small firm where she is a valued player with a great portfolio.
Another good friend of mine was recently appointed managing partner of a biglaw firm. In Joe Biden's words, this is a big f----g deal. She is in her early 50's raised two great boys, with her husband's help (he is a corporate executive who genuinely shared in the child rearing efforts) and had a full time nanny until a couple years ago. She is a national expert in her field and her clients are among the biggest companies in the US. She did slow down her career however when her boys were pre-school, but she came back strong and built an excellent career.
Our firm, like many others, is trying to develop our women attorneys into equity partners, because, not only is it the right thing to do, but more decision makers (especially in house attorneys at private companies) are women. All that said, I agree entirely with Susan Grigsby and the commenters -- the number of women equity partners is shamefully low. Suffice it to say, I'm trying to do a small something to change the situation. The pace of change is slow. For my mentees I'm targeting 5 years, when they both will be 15 year lawyers. For many other women attorneys it will be longer.