“Don’t let a win get to your head or a loss to your heart / Nonsense perseveres, prayers laced with fear / Beware, two triple O is near.” – Chuck D, Public Enemy
This week, Fast Company’s Jared Lindzon listed diversity and inclusion as one of the Top 5 Business Challenges of 2016. Although the Oscars Committee (aka the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences) may have not received the memo, hopefully the legal profession is up for the challenge.
As highlighted by Lindzon:
From ‘Vendor’ To ‘Partner’: How LexisNexis Is Deepening Law Firm Relationships
The company is emphasizing ‘white glove service’ in the AI era. Here’s what the initiative is delivering for clients.
A recent survey of 454 global organizations with more than $750 million in revenue published by Bersin by Deloitte found that organizations that implement diversity and inclusion policies perform better than those that don’t, earning 2.3 times higher cash flow per employee over a three-year period.
‘Now there’s proof, a lot of proof, that being inclusive as a company does pay off; it makes you a better performing company,’ says Josh Bersin, principal and founder of Bersin by Deloitte. ‘It’s moving out of HR and into a business-level issue, where CEOs are worried about it, and CEOs are setting targets, and CEOs are looking at things like unconscious bias training and holding themselves accountable.’
The legal profession isn’t any more diverse than Hollywood, but we should at least admit or recognize that a diverse and inclusive culture is good for the bottom line. According to the Boston Consulting Group, diverse companies outperform homogeneous ones. One study showed that a 1% increase in gender diversity correlates with a 3% gain in revenue, while a 1% increase in racial diversity correlates with a 9% gain in revenue. Diverse companies have better reputations—and by bringing together different points of view, they are also more innovative—than less diverse companies.
This week, Variety’s Tim Gray wrote about the lack of diversity among Oscar nominees:
Some may conclude that the nominations reflect institutional bias against minorities and women within the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences, but the problem is with Hollywood’s major studios and agencies. There were 305 films eligible this year. If hiring reflected the U.S. population, Oscar voters would have weighed 150-plus films directed by women, 45 directed by blacks, 50 by Hispanics, and dozens of movies by directors who are Asian-American, LGBT or members of other minorities. Of course, the actual tallies were a fraction of those numbers.
What You Didn’t Learn In Law School
How do you keep up with the competition? Share your perspective in this brief survey to help us benchmark your lifelong training in professional skills. As a thank you, qualified respondents receive a chance to win a $250 gift card.
As noted by Vulture’s Kevin Lincoln, actors of color were entirely shut out of the Academy Award nominations. Across all 20 of its acting nominations, including Best Actor and Actress and Best Supporting Actor and Actress, the Academy neglected to nominate a single actor of color. This is the second year in a row that the Academy neglected to honor any actors of color.
As stated by Forbes’s Dorie Clark, at many corporations, diversity is viewed as a “nice to have.” But according to Valerie Grillo, chief diversity officer at American Express, their commitment to diversity is “not just because it’s the right thing to do, but frankly, because our business leaders believe that a focus on diversity is actually going to help us with the bottom line.”
Grillo further states that diversity “helps with our retention, because our general employee base likes knowing they work for a company that has an inclusive workforce that supports equality.” As Dorie Clark describes in her book Stand Out, both employers and employees need to distinguish themselves in the marketplace, and a commitment to diversity can be an excellent brand cornerstone.
I understand that the Academy has made a concerted effort to diversify its membership and last year its president launched the A2020 initiative to further diversify the Academy itself and also encourage the industry to open up more opportunities for women and minorities. The Hollywood Reporter describes the A2020 initiative as “a five-year plan to study practices at the Academy with the aim of improving the diversity of its own staff and governance while also bringing new voices into the organization. It is also intended to encourage and to push the industry to examine its hiring practices and to begin to make changes.”
But for now, however sincere the Academy’s motivations, the results speak for themselves.
At the current rate, the 2020 U.S. Census Bureau report for the legal profession will look awfully similar to the 2010 report, which looked awfully similar to the 2000 report. And our industry will continue to look much more like a mirrortocracy than a meritocracy. If we don’t breathe a breath of fresh air into the industry, then diversity in our profession will remain on life support.
The Oscars Academy and Biglaw share similar demographics. Both in Hollywood and in the legal profession at every level, from the top on down, diversity is lagging behind society. But demography doesn’t have to be destiny. I don’t doubt that any of this year’s nominees is worthy of an Oscar, but I do believe many worthy candidates were left off the nominee list.
Just as greater diversity is good for Hollywood’s bottom line, greater diversity is good for the legal profession’s bottom line. By 2020, will the diversity and inclusion efforts of show business or the legal profession prove more fruitful?
Renwei Chung is the Diversity Columnist at Above the Law. You can contact Renwei by email at [email protected], follow him on Twitter (@renweichung), or connect with him on LinkedIn.