Minority Trial Lawyer »

Diversity Coalition Building: From Theory to Practice

Law firms are steadily increasing efforts to improve diversity through a variety of mechanisms. The majority of firms in the AmLaw 200 for 2008 have in place a diversity committee or task force. In addition to formal diversity committees, affinity or network groups provide a mechanism for attorneys to gather together based upon common background and experiences. Over the past 10 to 15 years, law firms have increased the number of diversity and affinity network groups available to attorneys. [1] Studies have shown that 97 percent of law firms have plans to start or already have affinity groups. [2] Additionally, over 90 percent of Fortune 500 companies have affinity groups. [3] Other efforts to increase diversity include diversity training and education, workshops, speaker series, community involvement, pipeline programs, diversity scholarships, and fellowships.

In a time where more law firms are expanding their focus on diversity, it is important also to focus on building coalitions between diverse attorneys of different backgrounds. Common affinity or diversity groups [4] that have emerged at law firms include:

• African American
• Asian/Pacific Islander
• GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender)
• Hispanic or Latino
• South Asian
• Middle Eastern
• Women

Initially these groups grew organically within firms when a core group of like-minded people decided they wanted to form an affinity group. When the popularity of affinity groups increased, many firms supported or even spearheaded efforts to start affinity groups. These affinity groups are often touted by firms in their recruiting efforts to diverse students as a way to demonstrate the firm’s commitment to diversity.

While law firm affinity groups that focus on each groups’ diversity are important and empowering, diverse attorneys should also not foreclose the opportunity to work across diverse and non-diverse groups to form broader coalitions for the common good. Diversity and affinity groups within the legal community perform very valuable functions, and these groups should continue to flourish and grow. The potential, however, to bring about even broader changes in the legal field grow exponentially when these groups work together for a larger purpose.

For example, by working across different diversity groups, those individuals in the groups gain a better understanding of the important issues that each group faces. Once this dialogue is started, space is opened for further dialogue with non-diverse attorneys. Diversity goals cannot be reached until non-diverse attorneys in the majority are also involved in diversity efforts.

Theoretical Underpinnings
Everyone’s diversity issue is not the same. The problems and obstacles facing African American, Latino and Latina, South Asian, Middle Eastern, and other diverse groups can vary greatly. Ethnic and racial diversity issues are often different and separated from gender-based diversity issues. By actively engaging and cooperating with other groups, there is an opportunity to build coalitions that can bring about change and bring greater awareness of different diversity issues.

Too often in society there exists a quiet tension between diversity groups for a number of reasons, including lack of resources, time, and ability to change. Each group often wants “their piece of the proverbial pie.” [5] Thus, coalition building between diversity groups can be a difficult task because of the various competing interests. As diversity groups within law firms become more popular, members of these groups have to be cognizant of their positions vis-a-vie other groups. No single diversity group is more important than the other. The purpose of diversity or affinity groups is not to exclude, but rather to provide a space to come together based on shared experiences and interests. A theory on coalition building was put forth by Mari Matsuda that by working in coalitions “we compare our struggles and challenge one another’s assumptions. We learn of the gaps and absences in our knowledge.”[6] Often diverse attorneys from different backgrounds will have many varied experiences to share that add to overall diversity goals and ideals.

Strength in numbers is also a concept that applies in the context of diversity. Coalitions are absolutely necessary to stand against injustices that do occur, because “in unity there is strength.” [7] So instead of further splintering diversity efforts into singularly focused affinity groups, those groups would be better served to not only look within but also outside their groups for opportunities to improve diversity. Further, “separating out and ranking oppression denies and excludes these identities and ignores the valid concerns of many in our constituency.” [8]

This is not to say that diversity groups need to try and compare or find an exact experience amongst the others. Working to form coalitions is not to homogenize or try to make all experiences be the same. Many academics and theorists have explained that essentialism or pure analogy of one form of oppression to another is a dangerous move. [9] In this context, essentialism is the idea that there is such a thing as the “Black experience” or “women’s experience” that exists independent of other important variables. [10] Assuming that because a person falls into a certain category, he or she will have the same experiences as all other persons in that group is erroneous. Therefore, it is important not to put forward a monolithic “Black experience” or “women’s experience.” [11] There are ways, however, to discuss and understand varying experiences without falling into the trap of pure essentialism. The first step in this process is always dialogue, which is why building bridges between different diversity groups is so vital.

The purpose of coalition building is not to separate out and rank experiences but to increase awareness and understanding amongst the different groups. The challenge then is to build bridges without assuming or trying to find commonality that does not exist. There is still a powerful potential to share experiences and move beyond our differences to our interests that are common.

From Theory to Practice
While examining the theoretical underpinnings of coalition building is important and worthwhile, concrete and pragmatic steps need to be taken to garner that knowledge and put it into action. Diversity and affinity groups can work together to make practical gains both inside the firm and within the larger community. Instead of a single diversity or affinity group working on a pipeline program, groups could come together to work on projects. For example, the Urban Debate League (UDL) effort spearheaded by the Minority Trial Lawyer Committee is a prime example. UDL trains high school students in policy debate, which is the “most academically rigorous of all interscholastic speech activities.” [12] The benefits of those who participate in UDLs have been thoroughly documented through studies. [13] This pipeline effort can dramatically impact a student’s life, and attorneys can volunteer their time and energy into this activity. Instead of one affinity group working with the UDL, affinity groups at the firm could combine forces to work together with the community UDL. This effort not only brings more people into the process, but it is also a practical way to bridge divides and create coalitions for change. Additionally, diversity groups could judge and work with their local mock trial and moot court teams both at the high school and college level. This form of outreach is yet another way to be involved in the community in a positive way.

While affinity group meetings are important, different groups could consider periodic joint meetings to increase dialogue and understanding. Small steps such as this could go a long way to moving beyond the issues that divide us. If one affinity group hosts an event—whether it is within the firm or the community—other groups could show their support by attending. Groups could cosponsor speakers, events, and social outings. Attorneys should follow the lead of law student diversity groups that often pair together to sponsor events on campus. Much of the outreach that occurs between diversity groups at the law-school level gets lost once graduating students start practicing law.

Often, a platform of many diversity groups is to increase outreach within the community, and by joining forces with different groups, great strides can be made in volunteer efforts that impact the larger community. Diversity groups could work together on important community service projects or pro bono work. Service projects within the community serve the valuable purpose of helping the community and also provide an opportunity for coalition building between different diversity groups. A community service project sponsored by affinity groups could also be opened up to everyone as a mechanism to encourage greater involvement.

Finally, building bridges between different diversity groups also provides the opportunity for mentoring relationships. Especially at firms where diversity may be lacking, a diverse attorney may find a mentor in another group that he or she may not have been exposed to otherwise. Mentoring is important to all attorneys, and coalition building increases the opportunity for mentoring relationships to form. This idea applies to diversity groups in the community outside law firms. Networking and mentoring across groups within and outside the firm can be a valuable way to find mentors that one may not find within the firm.

Ultimately, the more coalitions that can be built and the more understanding that is gained between and within diversity groups, the more likely change is to occur. Once coalitions between diversity groups are solidified, the process of reaching out beyond diversity groups must begin. Non-diverse attorneys have a significant role to play in diversity initiatives because they are in the majority. Building upon relationships forged by diversity coalitions is the first step to building longer and wider bridges between all different groups. By fostering coalitions, diversity groups can also reach out to non-diverse attorneys to increase the dialogue and work together to try to reach diversity goals.

Rachel Saloom is an associate at Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP in Atlanta, Georgia.

This article appears in the Spring 2009 [member protected] issue of Minority Trial Lawyer, the newsletter of the Minority Trial Lawyer Committee.

Endnotes

Be the first to comment.

Copyright © 2009, American Bar Association. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or downloaded or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association.