In 1987, a study commissioned by the University of California reported on the state of diversity in San Francisco’s law firms, and found “profound disadvantages within the city’s legal workplaces.” In the aftermath of these findings, the Board of Directors of the Bar Association of San Francisco (BASF) adopted a set of Goals and Timetables for Minority Hiring and Advancement, an aggressive initiative to increase the percentage of minorities in San Francisco firms. The initiative was the first of its kind among bar associations, and resulted in over 100 Bay Area law firms voluntarily adopting the Goals and Timetables as their own.

 

Interim results were released in a 2005 report. As a result of the initiative, the respective percentages of minorities rose from 10% of associates and 3% of partners in 1990, to 24% of associates and 7% of partners overall in 2005, and 27% of associates and 8% of partners in large firms. The national figures in 2005 were 15% of associates and 4% of partners, placing San Francisco ahead of the national average. The 2005 numbers did not meet the BASF’s 2005 goal of 35% minority associates and 12% minority partners, but nevertheless the new figures represented a significant increase. Their findings regarding the features of successful diversity programs is therefore instructive for bar associations interested in adopting a similar model.

 

 

The report stated that “successful diversity programs have known, specific components, including:  

 

More detailed descriptions of these efforts may be found in the full report, which can be downloaded at http://www.sfbar.org/forms/diversity/diversity_report_2005.pdf.

 

 

What does it mean for a diversity program to be “successful?” In this case, “success” seems to have been equated with the increase in raw percentages of minority associates and partners. However, increasing raw percentages means little if the minorities who enter the firms don’t stay there, and the BASF acknowledged that minority retention rates are low:

 

Minority associates statistics have suffered from heavy attrition rates with Asian Americans bearing the brunt of attrition. […]

 

Minority attorneys, particularly Asian Americans, often attribute the high attrition rates of minority associates to stereotyping of minorities as “not partnership material” or “not leadership material.” Several Asian American associates believe that they are regarded by their firms as good enough to be “worker bees” but not good enough to advance further. (13)

 

To address the overcoming of stereotypes, the BASF recommended that law firms “offer training to address cultural sensitivity and stereotyping of minority attorneys in associate retention, leadership development, and partner promotion, including making available on BASF’s Web site the recently developed Internet MCLE training program based on recent psychological findings regarding implicit association and latent bias.” (48)

 

In his preface to the report, BASF President James Finberg noted that this was already being addressed—BASF had asked a psychologist from the University of Washington to create a “diversity training course specifically tailored to the San Francisco legal community,” which would be made available on the BASF website (iii). The details of the course and its impact remain to be seen, but we look forward to seeing the results in the next BASF report.

 

A descriptive list of the BASF’s diversity resources may be viewed at http://www.sfbar.org/diversity/resources.aspx, including information on how to obtain copies.

 

The views expressed in this article are solely the views of the author and and not LexisNexis.