Interview - Carl Cooper

A frank and in-depth interview with Carl Cooper Chief Diversity Officer at Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Gates.

You have been honored widely for recruiting and training diverse talent. What specific strategies or programs do you recommend to firms and businesses that wish to recruit and retain diverse talent?

The first step is to figure out where your law firm is in terms of diversity. You need to identify where your firm is and where you want to go. Are you going for diversity because you believe it will help the bottom line? Or will it give you a sense of moral superiority because diversity is the “right” thing to do? If you’re just trying to be diverse because everyone else is talking about it, is not a good move. I once had a firm tell me, “We don’t want a diversity audit or analysis. We know we’re not diverse, so we just want to start with a diversity program.” That’s a bad move. So you have to come to terms with what you’re trying to do in order to have a successful program.

One of the ways to become more inclusive is through a broader recruitment effort. Historically, law firms have attempted to reach their goals on diversity by using traditional “objective” criteria: LSAT scores, law review membership, undergraduate awards such as Phi Beta Kappa, etc. These factors weigh most positively toward majority students; however, minority students have other criteria that qualify them for inclusion into large law firms. Many of them demonstrate leadership qualities. Some had to work while they were in school; perhaps some are parents of young children. What schools did these students attend—did they attend a lower-ranked school because they received a scholarship and they could only get through law school with that kind of assistance? Firms should ask whether these students have done all these things but still maintained good grades. They need to change the criteria that they use to accept and recruit students.

Once you’ve recruited these students, it’s imperative that the firm have a collegial environment, where there is an expectation that minorities can and will succeed. The fact is people live up — or down — to your expectations. If your colleagues at your firm expect that you’re only an affirmative-action hire and you can’t make it, it will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Partners will treat minority associates as if they can’t make it, refusing to invest any time in mentoring them. Minority associates often get what some call “micro-messages” that they’re not going to make partner. Furthermore, the associates will then assume that every time they receive criticism, they’ll think it’s only because they’re minorities. So there’s a possibility that an un-welcoming environment will reinforce negative expectations on both sides. You’ve got to be sure that you make your colleagues aware of the micro messages they could be sending, and how these micro-messages will breed inequities.

Firms also need strong mentoring programs. In fact, you need to have mentor-training programs for both associates and partners. Many partners are not able to transfer their skill sets onto young associates. They may be proficient doing their own work, but it’s also critical that they be able to teach others how to be effective in the legal profession.

What tend to be the key barriers to firms’ hiring and retaining qualified ethnic minorities?

It’s the paradigm they use: “We only want kids from the top 10% of students from the top 10% of schools.” Obviously, every firm can’t get the top 10% of the top 10%, and they’ll take other students at those schools. When you take these folks, what is your expectation—the expectation is that they’re getting lesser students so you should expect less from them. They won’t do well. If you go in with the realization that your firm is not a top-10 firm anyway, if you’re more realistic about who you are you’ll be more satisfied with whom you get. If you’re not Skadden, you won’t get the top minorities from Harvard, Yale, and Columbia Law Schools. These other firms need to realize that they’re other firms for a reason, but students come to these firms because they’re not the term (Here, maybe “term” should be replaced with “the other firms.”)

Some people might say that their particular firm or business just hasn’t found any talented minorities, or perhaps they had one or two, but it didn’t work out. How would you respond to this statement?

It’s true. Law firms should not try to bring one minority associate in at a time. No one wants to be the only one; it’s too much of a burden. It’s too much pressure on the one, because the entire firm is looking at that person to either make it or fail, and they’ll use that one person’s experience to generalize all members of that minority group. Yet this doesn’t happen to = white students.

You need to have a critical mass at the partnership level. Firms should consider bringing them in laterally if necessary. That way young people can see partners who look like them, and that will reflect the sense of a diverse law firm. Of course, that doesn’t mean that minority partners have to mentor minority associates, but minority associates want to see women and ethnic minority partners because it serves a signal that a firm has a clear commitment to diversity.

In a recent law review article, over 10,000 minority associates were interviewed, and the article suggested that minority associates have a clearly different view from majority associates. African-American associates believe that they get poor assignments, not much nurturing or mentoring and that they are poorly treated. Ironically, Asian associates also had relatively low expectations around feeling welcomed.

This is in stark contrast to the figures that show at least 80% of white lawyers believe that everything is fine and that their individual firm is diverse. But 60% of minority associates disagree with these opinions vehemently; they don’t believe that law firms are diverse or inclusive. When the majority believes that they’ve done everything they can, but the minorities believe that the firm hasn’t done everything that it should do, you’re bound to have frustration and missed opportunities in the area of diversity. I would also include disabled people and members of the LGBT community. They too feel that they are not expected to do well. Consequently, they feel that their talents aren’t developed, and they’re certainly not showcased at firms. So the feeling of being marginalized is not unique to African-Americans. Many firms still aren’t doing enough to fulfill on the idea of embracing difference; they may tolerate diversity, but that is not the same as embracing diversity.

How does retention of diverse talent affect the bottom line? Does it really increase profits?

There’s no conclusive empirical evidence one way or the other; however, there is a lot of anecdotal evidence that suggests that diversity does enhance the bottom line. Of course, there’s no evidence at all to indicate that diversity detracts from the bottom line.

I know that in my own firm, we’ve gotten a lot more business from several of our chief clients because of our diversity initiatives. Some of them have even given us awards for our work in the area of diversity. However, we don’t just receive more work because we’re diverse—it’s in addition to other things as well. All corporations look at cost and quality first when deciding which firms to hire. It’s only when you have those two things that firms will then look to see whether you’re diverse. All firms have to be cost efficient and produce high-quality work.

Recently our firm sponsored the Corporate Council Women of Color Conference, and we met a number of women lawyers who were general counsel for Fortune 500 companies. We got a lot of business from just that one event. More and more General Counsel want their law firms to be more diverse. Sara Lee and Wal-Mart, for example, are leading in this area.

Does the increasing global economy have an impact on diversity initiatives? If so, how?

If you’re trying to be the outside counsel for any global industry, firms have to realize that their clients are operating in an expanded global market, and they’ve got to show that their workforce is multicultural. If they’re increasing the diversity amongst their own employees, they’ll want their vendors (such as law firms) to also be multi-cultural. These companies are engaged in international transactions that often expand into developing countries. Obviously, the majority of the world is not Caucasian, so it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that both companies and firms need to be more multicultural.

You’ve worked with British firms in the past, what was that like? How did they understand diversity? What were some of the key differences between UK firms and US firms?

In London, our firm was one of three to be included in the Mayor’s own diversity initiative. Both corporations and law firms are trying to be more diverse across the board. Of course, the London experience is not the same experience as the American one. They didn’t go through the legacy of slavery, the civil rights movement, and all those other factors that compelled the United States to attempt to repair the damage.

But London has had a lot of immigration in recent years. London does offer a lot of international business opportunities as one of the financial capitals of the world, so it has to be responsive to its international community. British firms are aware of the American experience, and they want to be ahead of the curve. Keep in mind, a lot of these firms are affiliates of American firms. The British don’t want to be led into the 21st century kicking and screaming, so they’re learning how to be diverse without disrupting their somewhat genteel society. The Magic Circle firms, in particular, believe in taking baby-steps. So they may not be moving as fast as the States, but they are moving and advancing. Across the board, Europe is making an effort, and they will be part of the mindset that companies will produce higher quality products and services if they’re inclusive.

British and European firms also need to embrace the idea of creating a pipeline of diverse talent. If you want more inclusion, firms have to start where education begins. It’s not enough to start at the law school level. In London, many of the reasons why people of color don’t get into top firms is that you have to be of a particular economic class to get into the elite schools, which then allows people to join elite firms and corporations. Firms need to work with outside organizations that work with ethnic minorities who show talent; together, minority students become prepared to matriculate to good schools and on to good firms. Many firms in the U.S. have outreach programs going into urban schools trying to entice, educate, and make students aware of the opportunities that come from a career in the law. This is the critical part of creating a pipeline if you want to have talented high-quality individuals at the other end. I’m very proud of our firm, because we’ve taken the lead in this area; we’ve even gone into elementary schools. I’m currently teaching a middle-school class in “Street Law.” So it’s necessary to start at the beginning in order to achieve great results in the long run.

Back to interview list