Addleshaws sets out goals to boost diversity
Share
Addleshaw Goddard has become the first major firm to establish a target for the proportion of female and ethnic minority partners it wants in its ranks, together with a timeframe in which it wants to achieve this.
The national firm has pledged to have 25 per cent women and 10 per cent of partners from a black and minority ethnic (BME) background by 2014.
Currently, 20 per cent of partners are female, which is above average for City firms, while 2 per cent of partners are BME.
Monica Burch, the firm’s first female senior partner and one of just two such women in the UK top 30, argues that the firm would not meet these objectives by means of positive discrimination, but instead by continuing existing schemes. These include mentoring and part-time working for equity partners.
However, Burch added that she expects “more proactivity”.
“Practice areas need to establish key performance indicators, it’ll be the responsibility of all the partners in the firm,” she commented.
This comes after Clifford Chance announced that it wanted to double the proportion of its female partners to 30 per cent of the total partner headcount (The Lawyer, 28 September 2009). Unlike Addleshaws, however, it did not establish a timeframe in which this should take place.
Readers' comments (5)
Bez | 1-Nov-2010 12:15 pm
Other than through postive discrimination, how are they going to do this?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 1-Nov-2010 1:19 pm
Contrary to what some think, there are factors other than merit (or lack thereof) that lead to under-representation of women in the workplace. Believe it or not, quite a few women CHOOSE not to take/pursue positions higher up on the ladder due to concerns regarding their family lives. Addleshaw Goddard doesn't have to resort to positive discrimination to boost the number of female partners. Flexible working schemes or the establishment of creche facilities for example could lessen the pressure put on women who feel at the moment they need to choose between being a mother or being a partner at their firm.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Shaun | 1-Nov-2010 4:15 pm
"Practice areas need to establish key performance indicators"
So all things being equal, a man would lose out to a woman on partnership promotion because her appointment would tick off objectives for the firm/other partners.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Slartybartfast | 1-Nov-2010 5:03 pm
@Shaun, 'All things being equal' is just a phrase you're using to defend the status quo. If all things were truly equal, there'd be as many women as men in the partnership anyway. Are we going to hear the usual predictable moaning from males who foresee their privileges being eroded?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Unconvinced | 7-Nov-2010 5:26 pm
160ish partners of whom 2% are BME = 3. To get to 10% that means 13 new BME partners in the next 3 rounds. Some could be lateral hires but the last round promoted 5 in total. Call me unconvinced but I struggle to see how the goals will be achieved without positive discrimination whether that is through the promotion process or lateral hires
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment