2016 Jul/Aug - Diversity & The Bar Magazine

THE BAR

MCCA Empowering People. Inspiring Leadership.

Split Decision When companies split, legal departments need to assess three primary areas to create two new legal teams.

THE TRUTH ABOUT ASSOCIATE RETENTION DO DIVERSE ATTORNEYS GET THE SAME OPPORTUNITIES? WHERE IS THE LMJ CLASS OF 2008?

JUL/AUG.2016

DIVERSITY

&

GLOBAL TEC FORUM

Empowering change in Technology Education and Careers.

MCCA’s Global TEC Forum: A New Event for Legal Professionals Learn about the most current trends, opportunities, and challenges facing the corporate legal and law firm communities today.

The Global TEC Forum will replace the CLE Expo in New Orleans on October 6-7, 2016.

Hyatt Regency New Orleans 601 Loyola Ave., New Orleans, LA

Why Global TEC Forum?

The Forum brings you the unique opportunity for MCCA members, corporate legal departments, and law firms, to network and attend training to move their careers forward.

There will be a CLE track on both days that will focus on how technology is helping your practice area move forward.

Join us in New Orleans and take advantage of the opportunity to: ● Meet attorneys from top law firms and corporate legal departments of Fortune®100 companies. ● Showcase your expertise on current substantive legal topics. ● Build recognition of your firm or company. ● Special Programs Sponsorship opportunities are available for this event. For more information please contact Mahzarine Chinoy at 202-739-5903 or sponsorship@mcca.com.

CONTENTS

Visit www.mcca.com for the latest information on our events, awards and research.

FEATURES

12 Split Decision

By Melanie Padgett Powers When companies split, legal departments need to assess three primary areas to create new legal teams.

16 Diversity Analytics: Do Diverse Attorneys Get the Same Opportunities?

By Sarah Babineau, MHR, PHR, SHRM-CP Find out about other analyses that you can use to assess the impact of programs and help determine any potential liabilities before they impact your firm’s diversity.

14 The Truth about

Associate Retention

By Mauricio Velasquez, MBA High associate turnover in a law firm is bad for business.

Find out what you can do to head off mass associate exits.

4 D I V E R S I T Y & T H E B A R JUL.AUG.2016 MCCA.COM

20 LMJ Class of 2008

By Glenn Cook The fourth installment of our series provides you with a class update and a personal story about what happened to an LMJ scholar after law school.

JUL.AUG.2016

MCCA® BOARD OF DIRECTORS Stuart Alderoty

Senior Executive Vice President and General Counsel HSBC North America Holdings Inc.

Ricardo Anzaldua

COLUMNS 6 | NOTES FROM THE PRESIDENT

Celebrating Diversity within the Legal Profession

By Jean Lee

8 | DIVERSE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT How I Land Client$ . . .

Or, How to be a Rainmaker

By Jewell Lim Esposito

9 | BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS

Why Being a Cockroach May Not Be a Bad Thing In 2016

By Alonzo L. Llorens

DEPARTMENTS 10 | SPOTLIGHTING

Womble Carlyle’s Betty Temple: Strategic Business Partner and Role Model for Women

By Kim Howard, CAE

24 | PROFILES IN PERSEVERANCE Attorney David Choi: Attention to Detail

By Tom Calarco

26 | DIVERSITY NEWS

We Can’t Do It without You!

By Gina Shishima

28 | MOVERS & SHAKERS

Executive Vice President and General Counsel MetLife, Inc.

Michelle Banks

MCCA Board Chair Former EVP, Global General Counsel, Chief Compliance Officer and Corporate Secretary Gap Inc.

Janice P. Brown Owner & Founder Brown Law Group

Clarissa Cerda

Former Chief Legal Strategist LifeLock, Inc.

A.B. Cruz, III

Executive Vice President and General Counsel Emergent Biosolutions, Inc.

Sandra Leung

Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary Bristol-Myers Squibb Company

PUBLICATIONS STAFF

Linda Lu

SVP Chief Litigation Officer Litigation and Employment Counseling Office of the Chief Legal and Governance Officer Nationwide Insurance Company

Gwen Marcus

Executive Vice President and General Counsel Showtime Networks, Inc.

Suzan Miller

Corporate Vice President, Deputy General Counsel, and Corporate Secretary Intel Corporation

Samuel M. Reeves

Senior Vice President, General Counsel for Walmart International Legal

Robin Sangston

Neil Wilcox

Senior Vice President and Associate General Counsel First Data Corporation

Michael Williams

Executive Vice President & General Counsel Staples, Inc.

Simone Wu

Senior Vice President, General Counsel, Corporate Secretary & Chief Compliance Officer Choice Hotels International

Jean Lee

President & CEO Minority Corporate Counsel Association

Kenneth S. Siegel

Board Members Emeritus

Chief Administrative Officer & General Counsel Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc.

Dawn Smith

Senior Vice President, Chief Compliance Officer & Secretary VMware

Design/Art Direction

Editor-in-Chief

Advertising

Kimberly A. Howard, CAE

Corporate VP, Deputy General Counsel Microsoft Business Development and Evangelism

VP/Chief Compliance Officer Cox Communications, Inc.

President & CEO Jean Lee

Mary E. Snapp

BonoTom Studio Inc.

M.J. Mrvica Associates Inc.

Thomas L. Sager Ballard Spahr LLP Hinton J. Lucas Catherine A. Lamboley Lloyd M. Johnson Chief Legal Executive LLC

MCCA® Staff

Mahzarine Chinoy David Chu Donna Crook Charles H. Hollins Jr. Behnaz Mistry Andrea Pimm

GENERAL INFORMATION Advertising For advertising inquiries, contact M.J. Mrvica Associates Inc. at mjmrvica@mrvica.com.

MCCA® Membership Please visit www.mcca.com/ membership for details.

General Information and Address Changes Send your questions, complaints and compliments to MCCA®, Kim Howard, CAE, Editor in Chief, kimhoward@ mcca.com. Address changes should be sent to membership@mcca.com.

Permissions and Reprints Reproduction of Diversity & the Bar in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. To obtain permission, visit www.mcca.com/dbmagazine and click on reprint request.

Copyright Copyright® 2016 by the Minority Corporate Counsel Association, ­Diversity & the Bar is published six times a year and is distributed to supporters and subscribers, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004.

The information contained in this publication has been provided to the Minority Corporate Counsel Association (MCCA®) by a variety of independent sources. While MCCA makes every effort to present accurate and reliable information, MCCA does not endorse, approve or certify such information, nor does MCCA guarantee the accuracy, completeness, efficacy or chronological sequence of any such information. Use of such information on the readers’ part is entirely voluntary, and reliance upon it should be undertaken only upon independent review and due diligence. References to any commercial product, process or service by trade name, trademark, service mark, manufacturer or otherwise shall not constitute or imply endorsement, preference, recommendation or the favor of MCCA. MCCA (including its employees and agents) assumes no responsibility for consequence resulting from the use of the information herein, or in

any respect for the content of such information, including (but not limited to) errors or omissions; the accuracy or reasonableness of factual or other data, including statistical or scientific assumptions, studies or conclusions; the defamatory nature of statements; ownership of copyright or other intellectual property rights; and the violation of property, privacy or personal rights of others. MCCA is not responsible for, and expressly disclaims and denies liability for, damages of any kind arising out of use, reference to or reliance upon such information. No guarantees or warranties, including (but not limited to) any express or implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular use or purpose, are made by MCCA with respect to such information.

Copyright in this publication, including all articles and editorial information contained herein, is exclusively owned by MCCA, and MCCA reserves all rights to such information.

MCCA is a tax-exempt corporation organized in accordance with section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Its tax ID number is 13-3920905.

MCCA.COM JUL.AUG.2016 D I V E R S I T Y

& T H E B A R 5

NOTES FROM THE CEO BY JEAN LEE

Celebrating Diversity within the Legal Profession AMERICA RECENTLY CELEBRATED ITS 240TH BIRTHDAY on July 4 and since its founding in 1776, its fabric of citizens has changed drastically, according to the U. S. Census Bureau.

Of 319 million U.S. citizens, 51% are female, 54 million are Latino, 40 million are senior citizens, 27 million are disabled, 18 million are Asian, 9 million are LGBTQ and 3.5 million are Muslim. Almost half the country belongs to minority groups. This is an excellent reminder that “everyday Americans” are more diverse than ever before. It’s also a painful reminder that the legal profession still has work to do.

According to the American Bar Association’s 2016 National Lawyer Population Survey, there are 1.3 million licensed lawyers in the U.S. Women make up 36% of those lawyers. 88% of the 1.3 million lawyers are white. On the flip side, law student numbers tell a different story. Female law students comprise 47% of the 2013-2014 academic year, and 28% are minorities. We know there is a disconnect between the percentage of women and minority law students vs. licensed lawyers. MCCA Diversity Gala honorees are bridging that diversity gap one small step at a time.

One night each year, MCCA and the legal profession come together to celebrate the efforts corporate legal departments and law firms are making toward diversifying our profession. In July, the MCCA Gala celebrated leaders in corporate legal departments by honoring our Employers of Choice: Bank of America, Excelon Corporation, Kellogg Company, Home Depot and Hewlett Packard Enterprise. We also applauded the work of the Thomas L. Sager Award Finalists, the law firms who are on the frontline of diversity efforts.

Akin Gump, Littler and Sheppard Mullin are law firms heralding diversity within their law firm.

To find out more about how these corporate legal departments and law firms create diverse legal teams, our upcoming September/October issue will feature

6 D I V E R S I T Y & T H E B A R JUL.AUG.2016 MCCA.COM

in-depth articles about them and our other winners. You will learn about the Lifetime Achievement Award honoree former Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr.; the Paula L. Ettelbrick Award honoree Lisa A. Linsky from McDermott, Will & Emery, LLP; and the George B. Vashon Innovator Award honorees Winston & Strawn and WGL Holdings, Inc.’s Leslie T. Thornton, senior vice president, general counsel and corporate secretary.

Thank you to all of the corporate legal departments and FANs who supported this event. It truly was a beautiful night celebrating leaders and legacies.

MCCA is conducting research to measure our profession’s progress in corporate legal departments and law firms. We will use the results of the research to develop best practices and training for our members to improve diversity at all levels. To be effective, we need your help. Please take a moment to complete our Corporate Demographic Survey and encourage your colleagues to do the same. It will help MCCA update and provide a more accurate picture of where we are today and how we can collaborate to be better. Thank you for your continued support of MCCA and its ­mission. ■ MCCA_law

www.facebook.com/mcca.law

LE

MCCA Creating Pathways to Diversity® Conference

N AR

ED SPIR N I be and T C NE N O

,C

July 18, 2016

Creating Pathways to Diversity® Conference Renaissance Washington Hotel | Washington, DC

Thank You for Your Support Your participation in MCCA’s 2016 Creating Pathways to Diversity® Conference made this event a success!

Trailblazer

Innovator

Pioneer

Catalyst

2016 Strategic Sponsors

DIVERSE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT BY JEWELL LIM ESPOSITO

How I Land Client$ . . .

Or, How to be a Rainmaker IN MY MARCH/APRIL COLUMN, I said: “In law school, professors don’t tell students there tend to be two types of attorneys in law firms: rainmakers versus service attorneys.” In this issue, I want to discuss how to develop business for your legal practice.

I am an ERISA/Tax lawyer who started 23 years ago at Dewey Ballantine (now Dewey & LeBouef ).

To survive in a law firm setting, I had to focus on business development early on (even as an associate!). I’m a partner now at Jackson Lewis, and I have been a partner at other law firms. Usually, I can annualize (and have exceeded) the $1 million range, a range in which I take particular pride, because. . . did I mention I am but a mere ERISA/Tax attorney?

My “sales force” has generated some $600,000 in annual business for my practice.

ERISA/Tax attorneys tend to service other lawyers’ client: for example, an employment litigation attorney might have some one-off 401(k) plan compliance work for me to handle (which I still do). Generally, ERISA/Tax attorneys are not the ones landing clients for other attorneys to service. I certainly do the standard business development by blogging and authoring, but I also generate business in creative ways. These allow me to generate and continue to proliferate clients annually.

“Employ” A Sales Force for about $600,000 in Business

Since when does an attorney use a sales force to generate business? I

8 D I V E R S I T Y & T H E B A R JUL.AUG.2016 MCCA.COM

do. Strategic alliances matter to my practice. I regard accountants and financial advisers as my well-positioned “sales force.” I rarely chase a company directly for its ERISA/ Tax work. Instead, I spend time getting to know the consultants who advise the companies who could someday need my legal services.

When those company clients ask their accountants and advisers for ERISA/Tax compliance work, I typically remain in the forefront of minds of the “sales force” as the “go to” and already vetted-out attorney. Note how it is a quid pro quo for Accountant Adam and Financial Adviser Fran, for I may have clients who need their services as well. My “sales force” has generated some $600,000 in annual business for my practice.

Run a Texas Hold ‘Em Poker Networking Group for about $200,000 in Business

One day I could feel my waist and hips expand as I drank another beer at yet another network happy hour. I knew there had to be a better way to build my network doing something I enjoyed. Then, it hit me. I would arrange a monthly, friendly, casual, and legal (there’s no rake!) business networking group, and we would play cards around a table where we would “straight” up discuss our business development needs and objectives.

We would solidify our relationships, get to know each other a bit

better professionally, but over a flop, turn, and river.

I managed to pull together some 50 of my hand-picked “sales force” (see above), who each rotate every 14 months or so to provide food and drink for this “full house” of business professionals. When those 50+ professionals are in need of an ERISA/Tax attorney, they think of the person who, for the last five years or so, has pinged them each month with an invitation to Poker Networking. Funny how a few card games here or there can generate some $200,000 in annual revenue!

Going “All-in” With Your Sales Force

I carve out a little time in every work day for some business development. Maybe it’s coffee with an accountant; maybe it’s a sushi lunch with a financial adviser.

What I’m really doing is finding the next “sales person” to invite to next month’s Poker Networking event!

All in the name of solidifying strategic relationships that help generate business for my practice. ■ JEWELL LIM ESPOSITO (Jewell.

Esposito@jacksonlewis. com) In addition to playing poker with her sales force, Jewell Lim Esposito (Jewell.

Esposito@jacksonlewis.com) likes to scuba dive, but she hasn’t figured out if playing poker underwater is a viable business development approach, so she sticks to land-based method.

BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS BY ALONZO L. LLORENS

Why Being a Cockroach May Not Be a Bad Thing in 2016 WHILE I THINK WE MAY NEED TO BE CAREFUL about overuse of catchy words and phrases to drive home a substantive point, use of the word “cockroach” is worthy of an exception in this case. In fact, I need to add another such catchy word to the equation – “unicorn.” So, what do a cockroach and a unicorn have in common? Not much, which is exactly the point. If 2015 was the year of the unicorn, then 2016 is predicted to be the year of the cockroach. I’ll explain.

Technology startups with minimum valuations of $1 billion are referred to as unicorns. Just like the mythical creature we tend to associate with a unicorn, these technology companies are viewed as so rarified, that they are known as unicorns. However, by the end of 2015, what was initially considered a next to impossible achievement for any startup (i.e., reaching a valuation of $1 billion), there were well over 100 technology startups that met the unicorn threshold.

Uber is a good example.

icant portion of the market. As a result, these companies continued to raise huge amounts of funds from venture capital firms, which drove up valuations. These moves were all great until a perfect storm of events developed that threatened the unicorns’ existence.

First, it’s hard for the public markets to absorb so many companies within the same period, with valuations more than $1 billion, through the initial public offering (IPO) process. Second, by the end of 2015, the public markets became

Unlike a unicorn, a cockroach is a technology startup that focuses on the fundamentals and positions itself such that it can survive even the worst of circumstances.

The environment, in 2015, was ripe for positioning technology startups to reach such astronomical valuations. First, venture capital firms were raising larger and larger funds as new investors decided to dabble in the space given continued low-interest rates and the high returns by venture capital firms as a result of deals like Facebook and others. Finally, Silicon Valley’s general philosophy for technology companies was to scale as quickly as possible and worry about profitability after first securing a signif-

jittery because of the unstableness of the global economy. Finally, given the fact that most of these companies aren’t generating substantial profits (if any at all), their valuations, in many instances, are no longer sustainable. As a result, unicorns are stuck between a rock and a hard place. They must either move forward with a down round (i.e., sell shares to new investors and a price that is lower than what existing shareholders paid for them), which is not very appealing, or attempt to go public at a time

when very few companies are actually going public. To deal with this conundrum, many of these socalled unicorns are reducing staff and taking other extraordinary measures to keep from failing.

This situation brings us to the cockroach. Unlike a unicorn, a cockroach is a technology startup that focuses on the fundamentals and positions itself such that it can survive even the worst of circumstances. Instead of focusing on achieving maximum valuations, cockroaches concentrate more on profitability and scaling at a measured pace with a solid infrastructure. Given that the market anticipates a slow year on the IPO front and a modest M&A market during 2016, these cockroaches seem more and more attractive.

The interesting thing here is that, although the timing varies, the common denominator between the two is scalability. As such, my sense is that the true alpha is somewhere in between. Nevertheless, at least for 2016, it appears as though it’s not too bad, after all, being a cockroach. ■ ALONZO L. LLORENS (allorens@gordonrees. com) is a partner with Gordon & Rees LLP and a member of the Business Transactions Practice Group.

MCCA.COM JUL.AUG.2016 D I V E R S I T Y

& T H E B A R 9

SPOTLIGHTING BY KIM HOWARD, CAE

Womble Carlyle’s Betty Temple: Strategic Business Partner and Role Model for Women GROWING UP, BETTY TEMPLE watched the interplay and relationships her entrepreneurial father had with his lawyers. He once told her that, “Real professional success is built on relationships, partnership and genuine trust.”

According to Temple, her father had wonderful business attorneys and she found it extremely interesting how they helped him grow his business. She has mirrored his observation in her approach to client relationships: Temple’s devotion to clients, building relationships and ensuring that deep relationships of trusts are there matters to her.

“I love working with clients on their business issues and helping them find solutions to problems that will matter for them,” ­Temple said.

Breaking the 140-Year Mold

Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice was established in 1876. Elizabeth “Betty” Temple is its first female chair and CEO. In this role, Temple is an anomaly. According to the “Vault/MCCA Law Firm Diversity Survey Report” released this spring, female attorneys only comprise 30 percent of law firms. And, the number of female partners in law firms is even less, hovering around 20 percent since 2007.

Simply because of her gender and new title, Temple is in an even more exclusive group: women who are in the highest leadership position within a law firm.

According to Law360’s

10 D I V E R S I T Y & T H E B A R JUL.AUG.2016 MCCA.COM

“2015 Glass Ceiling Report,” of the 143 firm-wide chair and managing partner positions at the top 100 firms in the Law360 400, only 15 are held by women. Along with these unique facts, Temple has had her shingle out at the same law firm since she passed her bar exam in 1989. What drew her to the firm and kept her

there all these years is the same reason she wants other firm lawyers to come and stay at Womble Carlyle: growth.

“I have always felt a sense of progression and movement at Womble Carlyle. Whether it was the next leadership or client opportunity, there was always room for growth. I was never bored and never felt like I was in the wrong place. I had tremendous sponsors and mentors here and I want to make sure that culture continues. I want lawyers to know that you can have a great career working at a law firm,” she said.

Temple says that the firm is putting its money where its mouth is by investing in the future of its employees. “We have a long view of someone’s career trajectory. We make sure that we invest in our employee’s career growth so that they have plenty of opportunities to enjoy their career with us,” she said.

For example, 10 years ago, the firm began the “Women of Womble” initiative to help women lawyers advance within the firm and in the profession. Those efforts have paid dividends, as in December 2015, Women in Law Empowerment Forum (WILEF) named Womble Carlyle a Gold Standard Law Firm for integrating women into the highest levels of firm leadership.

Business Perspective Matters to Clients

Because of her background as a business lawyer, Temple attributes her legal success to her ability to view clients and their needs from multiple angles. “Because of my corporate transactional background, I not only view a client situation through a legal lens, but a business lens. I often view the situation with a business eye first, then my legal eye,” she said. This approach to managing her legal practice has influenced her to create an Innovation Center at Womble Carlyle.

“We spend the majority of our day focused on billable hours, collections, budgets, etc. Law firms rarely spend time mimicking what our client’s do well to sustain their future: research and development. So, our management committee created a separate function for our future sustainability and we call it the Innovation Center. We have a separate board of directors who manages this process of getting ideas from staff and then acting upon those. Staff submit proposals on ideas such as ways to serve clients better, ways to grow and develop with our clients to stay relevant and such. It’s an excellent way not only to grow the firm, but get staff involved in planning for the future,” she said.

New Partners Radiate Gratitude for Mentors and Sponsors

Temple said that she loves recruiting for the firm because Womble Carlyle has a great story, including a long-standing dedication to client service, a rich history of community service and a deep-seated respect for the individual. Many attorneys and staff members choose to stay at Womble Carlyle for decades. In keeping with the theme of law firm career longevity, she is striving to make sure that women and minorities continue to have opportunities at the firm.

“Women can find good careers in law firms, continuously grow and stretch, have new opportunities and flexibility. Find the place that allows you to grow and develop and provides you with opportunities. Ask

about sponsors and mentors during the job interview and when you are hired, make sure that you find both. When you are job-hunting, ask the firm how many women are in leadership positions. Look for places where women have had opportunity and have been successful. Those are the kind of firms where you will have the most opportunity for success. But, I will caution that what matters is the quality of leadership positions, not necessarily the numbers,” Temple said.

Temple said that the firm’s sponsor/ mentor program happens organically, but a new partner dinner held in late in 2015, may put a new spin on this relationship.

The firm created a toast video with all of the new partners briefly discussing what his or her sponsor or mentor meant and thanking that person for their influence and help in becoming a partner.

“It was very touching to see the gratitude radiate from the new partners for their sponsors and mentors. It was an excellent reminder to senior leadership how much these efforts impact someone else in a positive way. I predict that we will have more senior leadership actively sponsor and mentor newer lawyers. What matters is that we leave the firm in better shape than we found it,” she said.

Regarding law firms and diversity, Temple said that the work is never complete and not necessarily as formal at Womble Carlyle as she would prefer.

“We are always working on it. You have to work on it. Nothing is going to happen on its own. Firms have to commit to it through words and actions and provide opportunities for diverse attorneys to succeed. Sponsor them. Everyone who wants to be successful should have a chance. Frequently it happens organically on teams.

But their merit came from identifying their potential, abilities, quality, in front of clients, telling them this is what’s important to be successful at this firm. Internally, firms have to identify the people who have incredible opportunity. Do they have a sponsor? And then the firm has to create a culture that supports it. But, the culture is

not it’s not just telling people. It’s leading by example and showing what the firm values. We all want to leave a legacy and make a difference at work,” Temple said.

Women Do Not Have to Pick between Personal and Business Lives

Although we are only a few months into her tenure as chair, Temple already knows that she wants her legacy to be. “I want to be a great role model. There’s an opportunity to be an exceptional role model for women. I have a family and a spouse who works in a different city. I want women to know that they can do this and that they have every chance to succeed. You are not limited to making a choice between your personal and business lives,” she said.

We asked Temple what she would say to one of her three children if one of them thought about becoming a lawyer.

She said that she would be thrilled and that she would recommend that they also pursue an MBA as well. “An MBA provides you with an instant understanding of business that most lawyers do not have. Take the extra year. It will be worth it so that you can be a strategic business advisor and not just a lawyer.”

Temple said that if she were not a lawyer, should would have been a history professor or maybe an author. Her true love of history shows in her personal life.

She and her family live in a 1904 restored farm house and are currently building a carriage house out of reclaimed materials on the property.

“We are truly off the grid when we come home. I do travel extensively during the week, so the weekends are my time to relax. Living here is such a contrast to my work life and the atmosphere provides me with a mental health break. The view, taking care of the animals and taking care of something other than the law firm feeds me. We all need a break from our professional life to re-energize so that we can be better at our day jobs,” Temple said. ■ KIM HOWARD, CAE (kimhoward@mcca.com) is the editor in chief of Diversity & the Bar.

MCCA.COM JUL.AUG.2016 D I V E R S I T Y

& T H E B A R 11

When companies split, legal departments need to assess three primary areas to create two new legal teams.

Split Decision

By Melanie Padgett Powers

WHEN FORTUNE® 500 COMPANIES announce they’re splitting in two, analysts debate how the split will affect earnings, shareholders and the future of the now-two companies. But there’s little external attention paid to an important internal challenge: splitting one legal department into two.

That’s where Kevin Clem comes in. As a managing director and the practice group leader for HBR’s Law Department Consulting Practice, Clem and his team have advised several Fortune® 100 companies on how to manage these major departmental changes.

12 D I V E R S I T Y & T H E B A R JUL.AUG.2016 MCCA.COM

Companies will often hire a strategic consulting firm to oversee the split, but HBR focuses solely on optimizing the two legal departments, an area of expertise attorneys don’t often have.

“These are not common occurrences, and they require some specialized expertise and experience to help drive efficiency during what is otherwise quite an unsettling phase of a company’s history,” Clem said. “This isn’t taught in law school—navigating organizational change and change management. It’s a new skill set and one I think lawyers would be well-served to do some research on, or at least become familiar with principles that drive successful change efforts.”

Creating Two Legal Departments

When companies, and thus legal departments, split, there are three primary areas they should focus on, according to Clem.

SHUTTERSTOCK

While separations are not frequent, there have been a couple of high-profile ones in recent years. “It’s certainly gaining a little more traction as companies seek to create greater shareholder value,” Clem said.

Notable recent separations include Hewlett-Packard, which split its hardware and services businesses into two companies, and eBay, which split from PayPal last summer. Most recently, Xerox Corp. announced in January it was also splitting up its hardware and services components. Hardware and services can be very different businesses in terms of growth and profit potential, Clem said.

“Having [them] under a single organizational strategy doesn’t necessarily create the same type of opportunities for ongoing investment and a consistent strategic direction,” he said. “It’s often predicated by a shift that has taken place over time within the organization, where two separate corporate strategies have emerged.”

1. People The larger overall consulting firm will often work with the company’s executives to determine the number of people each legal department will have. But then the company must decide which types of positions will go to each business. HBR advises on this organizational design component, helping to determine the “boxes” that each law department needs.

“How many boxes make sense on your org chart in the new law department structure? What kind of structure makes sense in this new normal? Do we have the right number of people in the right areas? What will the business now require in terms of business support?” Clem asks.

He points to Xerox as an example. The hardware side of the business relies heavily on the intellectual property, including numerous patents, so the legal team will likely maintain a significant staff with expertise in those areas. On the services side, there will likely be a greater focus on contracting, such as establishing new relationships with key accounts.

It’s important to start with an assessment of the current legal team. “There’s a benefit to understanding the activities and the nature of the work being performed by the people to help inform which side of the business they move into post-separation,” Clem said.

What areas of the business is each person supporting? What is each person’s expertise and/or preference? For some roles that are less tied to a particular business, such as litigation, it may not be as obvious where a person would fit best.

2. Processes After assessing the legal team’s strengths and resource requirements, the company should focus on business processes, which can include how work is received and allocated to individuals, how outside counsel is engaged and how matters are resolved.

“The overall business process may differ; companies need to think through how they do things today as one company and whether that is going to be the way they continue to do things as two companies,” Clem said.

It’s a time to refresh and rethink, he said. He likens it to moving into a new home and deciding how to restock your kitchen cabinets. Will they be based on the way you lived in your previous home or will you re-imagine the layout for better flow and function?

It’s helpful for legal departments to map out all the current processes and then evaluate which should stay the same, which need to be refined and what new processes are needed.

“It’s a chance to revisit and say, ‘are my processes aligned with best-in-class processes … or does this give me a chance to assess our work and start a new series of processes?’” Clem said.

3. Technology While the company at large will oversee technology issues such as computers, security and email, legal departments have their own unique tools and systems, for areas such as e-discovery, matter management, e-billing, contract management and document management.

“Sometimes companies will keep the tools they have and just separate the data,” Clem said. Other times, “there may be a chance to reevaluate the tools that you have and [ask] ‘now that we Kevin Clem have a blank slate of sorts, does it make sense to continue using what we’ve always used?’”

This can be an opportunity to upgrade, replace or consolidate systems and software programs.

When As part of the technology discussion, the legal a huge department needs to address data, including who will take control of which pieces of the current data, as well company as how department will track, measure and report on future data. splits into

Time for Opportunity

When a huge company splits into two, it can take a year or more to make and implement all the necessary decisions to create two companies. It can be a hectic and unsettling time for legal departments, but it can also be a time for innovation and a fresh start. The two new law departments can realign their structures, develop a new set of norms and implement best-in-class processes.

“It’s a chance to flex your organizational design muscles that are often not needed when you’re in a stable law department that isn’t going through as significant a change as a separation,” Clem said. “It can be a good development opportunity in terms of taking on new responsibilities. … I see it as an opportunity to test habits and create some new processes or new approaches to solving your clients’ business problems and your legal operational strategies that you don’t often get.” ■

two, it can take a year or more to make and implement all the necessary decisions to create two companies.

MELANIE PADGETT POWERS (i.am.meledits@gmail.com) is a freelance writer and editor in the Washington, D.C., area. Connect with her @MelEdits on Twitter.

MCCA.COM JUL.AUG.2016 D I V E R S I T Y

& T H E B A R 13

By Mauricio Velasquez, MBA

I am often asked by our clients to “help us stop the bleeding.” Law firms invest so much in sourcing, recruiting and developing their talented associates and to see them leave prematurely can be disastrous. One of my clients had lost nearly a dozen partners and associates (almost all were women and minorities, top performers) in a particular practice area in several weeks.

My client asked how to fix the situation. I suggested conducting external, third party, post-exit interviews. My client was open to the suggestion, sent a cover letter to the former employees saying I would call and follow up. I called and reached all of them.

They were told that their responses would be anonymous and answers “would be aggregated” I would only share what kept coming up over and over again and that no individual comments would be shared with the law firm client.

Here are the questions I asked: ■■What attracted you to this firm in the first place?

(Original Expectation) ■■What was your experience like? (Open, not leading question) ■■What did you like best about your experience, this firm? What can this firm build on?

■■Why did you leave? The real reason—what you did not say before you left?

■■Where could they improve? Number one area for improvement?

■■What would make you come back? (Would they come back if changes were made? Might they boomerang back?)

SHUTTERSTOCK

14 D I V E R S I T Y & T H E B A R JUL.AUG.2016 MCCA.COM

The Truth about

All of the attorneys took my call, participated and appreciated the opportunity to share their comments.

Keep in mind that this is good for firm image building post exit. What they told me in this one law firm example, supports what we are finding with all of our legal work in the associate retention practice area.

“in group” or “dominant group.” This associate has no mentor, no advocate and no anchor in the law firm.

This trend also confirms why we are seeing a resurgence in our mentoring profession. There are plenty of reasons for associates to leave. Give them more compelling and better reasons to stay.

So What Did Associates Say?

Ask Before They Leave

Associates leave their firms because: ■■They don’t like the way they are being treated (Based on a pattern of treatment); ■■They don’t know if they are “partner material” (Do I have what it takes?); ■■They don’t know what the “partner track really is” (The partner track is shrouded in mystery.); ■■They don’t want to be a partner (no alternative track); ■■They want to have a family and are looking for a non-traditional, maybe part-time track, alternatives; ■■They don’t feel valued—not getting choice assignments, not being mentored, not getting feedback.

They don’t feel “embedded in the firm.”

■■They don’t know the direction of the firm—a great deal of uncertainty exists, hearsay, gossip, and no one is sharing the direction, future, trends; ■■They have not “found their place”—moving between practice areas, don’t have a mentor, no real anchor to the firm; ■■Their expectations were never met—“they told me this was a lifestyle firm—farthest thing from the truth, a total lie.” False expectations are the center of many issues. Do not tout something on your website and recruitment literature that is not true.

Ultimately there is a mismatch or misalignment of expectations between the law firm and the employee.

Or, the associate is lost in the “unsaid.” How often after a key associate leaves do partners tell me “Oh I thought he/she was being mentored by that partner or this partner?” The old “I had no idea” reaction is extremely common. Or, the partner tells me “He/she was close to partner XY. I thought he/she knew. Nobody told him/her?”

Our research tell us that this is more common with women and minorities in firms. Women and minorities are not part of nor do they feel embedded in the

Our clients are conducting “pre-exit interviews” or what we call “retention interviews” for their firms.

Questions similar to the ones you read earlier are either asked by internal personnel or an outside consultant. It is amazing what associates tell us but would never tell anyone inside the firm.

Trying to head off the exiting associate at the pass is smart business. It is much more cost effective to keep your existing talent than to go and find new and untested talent. Start asking the difficult questions before your associate leaves and be ready for the answers.

Who Is in Charge of Associate Retention?

Do you have someone or more than one person in charge of associate retention? Are they approachable?

Do your associates trust this person? Trust is critical.

Don’t know? Ask your associates and consider using an external party or platform that cannot track where the feedback came from. Start with questions such as “Who do you go to for help, for career advice, for counsel? Do you trust our associate development person?

Yes/No and why—please give us specific examples.”

Doing the same things we have always done with your associates in your firm is just not working. If associates are different, the market is different, and clients are different—why are you sticking to your old plan? Make the tough adjustments now, before it is too late. Many firms are top heavy, partner heavy and several associates leaving at the same time is the start of the decline. We all know that you make more money with your associates. What are you doing in your firm that is working? What associate retention practices are you finding effective? I would like to hear about what is working for your firm. ■

Our research tells us that this is more common with women and minorities in firms.

Women and minorities are not part of nor do they feel embedded in the “in group” or “dominant group.”

MAURICIO VELÁSQUEZ, MBA, (mauriciov@diversitydtg.com) is president and CEO of the Diversity Training Group and has worked in the legal space for 25 years.

Associate Retention MCCA.COM JUL.AUG.2016 D I V E R S I T Y

& T H E B A R 15

Diversity Analytics:

By Sarah Babineau, MHR, PHR, SHRM-CP

16 D I V E R S I T Y & T H E B A R JUL.AUG.2016 MCCA.COM

Do Diverse Attorneys Get the Same Opportunities?

M

ANY LAW FIRM DIVERSITY professionals use common human resource metrics to determine whether diverse associates and partners are being hired, promoted and separated at the same rates as non-diverse attorneys. We know how to scan diverse associate reviews for bias based on demographics, such as noting that the assessment writing skills of associates of color are graded more harshly than those of white associates, or by noticing that only the women attorneys’ reviews mention that they take on projects “with a smile.” We know how to examine exit interview trends among different demographics to see if there are patterns in the reasons provided by associates who choose to leave and the practice groups from which they depart. This article introduces other analyses that can be used to assess the impact of programs and help determine any potential liabilities before they impact your firm’s diversity.

SHUTTERSTOCK

Standard Metrics

Large law firms (701+), might find it helpful to group all of the diverse attorneys, including women, attorneys of color, LGBT attorneys, attorneys with disabilities (or other demographics your firm considers diverse) into one group and compare them to the non-diverse category. In this example, the non-diverse attorneys would be those who self-identify as straight, white, men who do not have a disability. Having a non-diverse control group allows you to quickly determine if the trends that you see are related to diversity or other firm or industry pressures.

In the example shown in Figure 1, using a range of dates (i.e. 1/1/2014 to 12/31/2014 compared to 1/1/2015 to 12/31/2015) we see that our firm has increased the representation of diverse attorneys since 2014. We recommend using the range of dates approach for representation instead of a single or multiple points in time

FIGURE 1

Attorney Representation 2014 to 2015 80% 76% 75%

■ 2014

70%

■ 2015 66% 63%

60%

61% 55%

50% 45%

40%

39%

37%

30%

33% 24% 25%

20% 10% 0%

Diverse

NonDiverse All Attorneys

Diverse

NonDiverse Associates

Diverse

NonDiverse Partners

averaged together because other activities, such as hiring, promotion and separations will be measured over a range of dates. The comparison between those activities and the representation will then be most accurate.

Another suitable approach to making sure that the increased diversity of one group does not cancel out any indicators of problems in other groups is to separate each diverse attorney group and compare each data set to the non-diverse control group. A comparison to the overall legal industry is also helpful, though there is no non-diverse control group data presently available for the overall industry. Figure 2 expresses that the increase in diversity among associates from 2014 to 2015 (55 percent to 61 percent) is not distributed evenly among all diverse categories. The increase in women and LGBT associates (2.82 and .9 percent respectively) is masking a decrease in associates of color and associates with disabilities (.94 and .01 percent).

MCCA.COM JUL.AUG.2016 D I V E R S I T Y

& T H E B A R 17

FIGURE 2

Attorney Representation Comparison 2014, 2015 and NALP 2015 Industry Averages for Large Law Firms (701+ Attorneys) 2014 All Attorneys

2015

832

NALP %

852

Women

295

34.65%

279

32.75%

35.06%

Of Color

105

12.38%

124

14.55%

16.31%

9

1.11%

19

2.23%

2.65% 0.13%

LGBT With Disability Non-Diverse

1

0.09%

1

0.12%

562

66.01%

534

62.68%

Associates

461

466

Women

216

46.32%

229

49.14%

45.06%

Of Color

115

24.76%

111

23.82%

23.28%

LGBT

9

1.89%

13

2.79%

3.24%

With Disability

1

0.22%

1

0.21%

0.11%

209

44.89%

182

39.06%

Non-Diverse Partners

319

323

Women

63

19.38%

55

17.03%

Of Color

26

8.03%

24

7.43%

8.29%

4

1.35%

3

0.93%

2.01% 0.10%

LGBT With Disability Non-Diverse

0

0.00%

0

0.00%

244

75.69%

241

74.61%

Summer Associates

15

20.35%

12

Women

7

54.80%

8

66.67%

45.78%

Of Color

5

37.77%

5

41.67%

31.36%

LGBT

2

15.00%

3

25.00%

4.40%

With Disability

0

0.00%

1

8.33%

0.05%

Non-Diverse

2

19.02%

2

16.67%

In another application, if your firm’s attrition rate for diverse attorneys is high, and the attrition rate for non-diverse attorneys is also high, you may be experiencing a firm-wide contraction; where if your attrition rate for diverse attorneys is trending high, but your attrition of non-diverse attorneys is not, then you might want to look more closely into the reasons for departure of those diverse attorneys to identify if there is a correlation to any diverse demographic or separation reason.

Diving Deeper

Measuring the activities of diverse attorneys consistently with other HR metrics demonstrates an understanding of workforce analysis practices and gives greater insight into the experience of diverse attorneys, when compared to those who are not diverse. The problem with leaving the analysis at this level is that the reasons for the statistical changes remain buried.

Even information gleaned from exit interviews, career coaching sessions and engagement surveys tend not to carry the same weight of the types of analysis that other departments might place before your chairperson. An analysis from the finance department or the IT

18 D I V E R S I T Y & T H E B A R JUL.AUG.2016 MCCA.COM

To truly get a sense of the opportunities that your attorneys are receiving, we recommend analyzing the average or median annualized hours of diverse attorneys compared to non-diverse attorneys by practice group and level. department has a seemingly more direct connection to the profitability of a firm and busy leaders look to make meaning of such analyses quickly.

To truly get a sense of the opportunities that your attorneys are receiving, we recommend analyzing the average or median annualized hours of diverse attorneys compared to non-diverse attorneys by practice group and level. For example, as shown in Figure 3, three practice groups are analyzed by diversity and level of experience as indicated by class year. Level I comprise classes 1–3, level II comprise classes 4–6 and level III comprise classes 7+. Full utilization is defined as averaging 2,000 annualized hours.

Including a test of statistical significance of the difference in average hours, in this case standard deviations, makes the argument that any group with a standard deviation of 2.00 or more could mean the difference in the assignment of hours is being influenced by something other than random chance. This opens the door to conversations about the effects of unconscious bias, assigning projects outside of formal workflow systems and how to promote parity. There is also the opportunity to look at the quality of assignments at junior levels and the outcomes of these assignments as these attorneys rise to mid- and senior-level associates.

In the Litigation practice group, we see that diverse attorneys at levels I and II average more hours than non-diverse attorneys. While on the surface, this looks like what we would hope to see; at level III diverse attorneys have much lower average hours; and, there are only 10 diverse partners compared to 80 non-diverse partners. With these results, the quality of the work assignments given at levels I and II should be reviewed. We might find that while the diverse attorneys in levels I and II are close to fully utilized, they could be receiving a disproportionate amount of document review or other kinds of assignments that leave them unprepared for litigation when they reach level III. If they are less qualified to litigate matters, due to a lack of exposure and court room experience, it likely follows that this results in increased attrition at level III, and

FIGURE 3

Practice Area—Labor and Employment Average Annualized Hours—Data 1.1.15 to 12.31.15 Practice Group—Employee Benefits Diverse

#TK

Non-Diverse

Avg Hrs

# TK

Overall

Avg Hrs

# TK

Avg Hrs

Overall Group Libilization Rate

% Libilization of Diverse TK

% Libilization of NonDiverse TK

Statistically Significant Standard For Diverse Deviations Attorneys?

Level I

40

1,821

20

1,901

60

1,861

93.1%

91.05%

95.1%

0.57

Level II

20

1,555

40

1,927

60

1,741

87.1%

77.75%

96.4%

2.02

Level III

0

0

30

1,732

30

866

43.3%

9,99%

86.6%

Partners

10

1,622

30

1,873

40

1,748

874%

81.10%

93.7%

Avg Hrs

Overall Group Libilization Rate

% Libilization of Diverse TK

% Libilization of NonDiverse TK

1,485

74.2%

77.6%

70.9%

Yes

1.03

Practice Group—Affirmative Action Diverse

Non-Diverse

#TK

Avg Hrs

# TK

Avg Hrs

Level I

80

1,551

80

1,418

Overall

# TK 160

Statistically Significant Standard For Diverse Deviations Attorneys?

0.96

Level II

100

1,555

80

1,604

180

1,580

79.0%

77.8%

80.2%

0.40

Level III

40

1,231

100

1.732

140

1,482

74.1%

61.6%

86.6%

3.06

Yes

Partners

40

1,805

70

1,994

110

1,900

95.0%

90.3%

99.7%

2.18

Yes

Overall Group Libilization Rate

% Libilization of Diverse TK

% Libilization of NonDiverse TK

Practice Group—Litigation Diverse

#TK

Non-Diverse

Avg Hrs

# TK

Avg Hrs

Overall

# TK

Avg Hrs

Statistically Significant Standard For Diverse Deviations Attorneys?

Level I

100

1,958

120

1,870

220

1,914

95.7%

97.9%

935%

160

Level II

80

1,839

70

1,616

150

1,728

86.4%

92.0%

80.8%

199

Level III

90

1,123

90

1,711

180

1,417

70.9%

56.2%

85.6%

4.34

Partners

10

1,702

80

1,971

90

1,837

91.8%

85.1%

98.6%

146

potentially results in fewer qualified candidates for partnership. While each level is analyzed separately, making meaning of the analysis requires looking at the details of both the individual levels and the full picture of the practice group.

This high-level analysis also runs the risk of aggregating too much data and masking some of the results with smaller groups, such as if you were to analyze each category of diverse attorney individually and compare to the overall average hours. This would result in smaller groups for analysis and you would need to use a different test for statistical significance. Standard deviation is not recommended for groups smaller than 10 individuals. We recommend using a Fisher’s Exact test, which has the benefit of being able to analyze groups smaller than 10, and being an exact calculation rather than an approximation of statistical significance.

Drawing Conclusions and Making Recommendations

While we, at Compass Metrics, place a strong emphasis on the numbers, it is for the purpose of getting the buy-in from stakeholders to give the time- and

Yes

mind-share to doing something with the results as they would with data from the accounts receivable’s department. The numbers only tell part of the story.

With high-level analyses such as those above, next steps might be to further analyze each practice group level by demographic category or by class year, particularly if you know that a specific demographic needs attention, or you might be able to integrate the qualitative information you already have into the results. An executive report that combines scientifically validated statistics with information gleaned from exit interviews, mentoring and coaching sessions will attract the attention of your stakeholders, convince them that the diversity programs in place are a business necessity and even help make the case that a bigger investment in workflow systems and compensation with an emphasis on diversity are practical and valuable to your firm. ■ SARAH BABINEAU, MHR, PHR, SHRM-CP (sarah.babineau@ compassmetrics.com) is the managing partner of Compass Metrics, LLC, a certified woman-owned, disability-owned business enterprise.

The consultancy focuses on law and professional services firm diversity metrics and analysis, and inclusion of disability in diversity programs.

MCCA.COM JUL.AUG.2016 D I V E R S I T Y

& T H E B A R 19

E I G H T Y E A RS A F T E R R E C E I V I N G T H E L M J

Finding the Class of 2008

By GLENN COOK

WHEN CARLY BAD HEART BULL and her twin sister, Kate, were in their mid 20s, they were considered statistics. Both had dropped out of school before they turned 16, a common problem that plagues Native American students, and faced a life with limited career options.

“Growing up all over, we had a difficult time in school,” said Bad Heart Bull. “I read all the time and got good grades, but as Native students, we felt pretty invisible in the school system. We were usually the only Native students in our classes, and our people weren’t talked about. We didn’t feel like we mattered because our heritage was not discussed.”

That heritage, steeped in Dakota traditions, proved to be a powerful calling card, one that led both sisters from the Southwest to their native homeland. Both went back to school, earning advanced degrees, and now are working to change the fortunes of Native Americans in Minnesota and North and South Dakota.

Carly, who worked full time while earning her associate’s and bachelor’s degrees, went to law school at the University of Minnesota in large part due to the Minority Corporate Counsel Association’s LMJ Scholarship. She was one of 18 recipients in the 2008 class, the fourth such group to receive the honor.

“I decided that I really wanted to serve my people, and I knew the only way to do that in the best way possible was to go to school and get an education,” said Bad Heart Bull, now the Native Nations Activities Manager for the St. Paul-based Bush Foundation, a philanthropic organization. “I definitely went the non-traditional route to get here, but I feel very fortunate that I get to do this work.”

A Non-Linear Path to Law School

Given their family’s background and history, the fact that Carly and Kate Beane decided to drop out of high school before their 16th birthday must have come as a shock to their parents. But it also points to the complicated path that many Native Americans have faced for more than 150 years.

20 D I V E R S I T Y & T H E B A R JUL.AUG.2016 MCCA.COM

The girls spent their childhood in Arizona and Nebraska, where their father Syd ran citywide Indian Centers in Phoenix and Lincoln and their mother taught school. Their ancestors were exiled from Minnesota to South Dakota after the bloody Dakota War of 1862; Syd’s great-uncle, Charles Eastman, later helped found the Boy Scouts of America and worked to improve the lives of Native American youth through his writing and speeches.

“I always knew I was Native, but we grew up in urban Native, pan-Indian communities,” said Carly, who took her husband’s last name (Bad Heart Bull) after they married. “We would spend our summers on the reservation, and go to ceremonies now and then, but we didn’t grow up speaking the Dakota language.

Something was always missing.”

After dropping out, Bad Heart Bull worked in numerous low to mid-paying jobs in the San Francisco area. She enrolled in a community college program designed for working adults, then decided to return to Minnesota so she could learn more about her heritage.

“I wanted to study the language, to learn the songs and stories, and somehow find a way to become reconnected to my roots,” she said. “When I started to do that, I found a better understanding of who I am as a Dakota woman and as a human being. As I became more connected, I started volunteering in my community and realized I needed to go back to school.”

S C H O L A RS H I P Bad Heart Bull started studying the Dakota language at University of Minnesota, where she graduated with a bachelor’s degree in history and American Indian studies. She taught the language to preschoolers and kindergarten students in an immersion program in South Minneapolis and started advocating for families at the Indian Child Welfare Act Law Center.

“I loved my work, but at a certain point in time I didn’t want to be a teacher any longer,” she said. “I felt that I was meant to something else to serve my people in a different way. I started talking to people who I respected who worked in the community, and they told me to go to law school. To truly help make a difference, I needed to learn the language of the law.”

LMJ Scholarship Helps Pave the Way

The LMJ Scholarship, which started handing out law school monies in 2005, is designed to help law students who are highly qualified but face steep financial hardships. Recipients receive $10,000 for their first year of law school, and can quality to receive the same amount in their second and third years.

Most of the recipients are in their early to mid 20s when they earn the scholarships. Bad Heart Bull had just turned 30, which she said only increased her gratitude.

“I felt so honored to receive it because it was from an organization that was looking at people of color and people from communities that haven’t always had the most opportunities in the legal world,” she said. “Law schools in general need more people who come from communities who know the obstacles to opportunities that I know, and MCCA knows the type of people we need. I was really proud that they chose me.”

Bad Heart Bull graduated from law school in 2011, then worked as a law clerk for a district judge and in the child protection division of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office. She soon realized that advocacy for Native Americans would be a better use of her skills than working in courtrooms.

“I wanted to be in a place where I could utilize my skills and my connections as a bridge between the different worlds I walked in. If I could sit at those tables and be an advocate, I could give access to some of my relatives and members of my community that they haven’t had.”

In 2014, Bad Heart Bull joined the Bush Foundation as a Ron McKinley Philanthropy Fellow in the organi-

Carly Bad Heart Bull

zation’s education division. Established by 3M executive Archibald Bush and his wife, Edyth, in 1953, the foundation works in communities in Minnesota, the Dakotas, and the 23 Native nations that share the same geographic area.

“For people in fields who don’t have an understanding of how a Native country works, it can get pretty complicated. You’ve got federal, state, and tribal entities. You’ve got jurisdiction issues. You’ve got different school systems,” said Bad Heart Bull, who was hired as a full-time staff member at the foundation in April.

“There are a lot of complicated pieces of information that come from the Native community.

“Having the legal background to explain to my colleagues the landscape of the communities we are working and partnering with, as well as understanding some of the hurdles and opportunities, is proving invaluable.”

You Can Go Home Again

Today, Bad Heart Bull and her husband, Jay, live in South Minneapolis. Her sister, Kate, followed her to Minnesota, enrolled in college and received her doctorate in American Indian Studies. Kate now works as a tribal liaison with the Minnesota Historical Society and is a Dakota history scholar.

“We’ve come a long way,” Carly said. “You could say we’re proof that you can go home again.”

Earlier this year, the sisters were appointed to a community advisory committee that is looking at possible renovations for Lake Calhoun and Lake Harriet, two of the largest regional attractions in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area. Their family’s ancestral village, Heyata

Most of the recipients are in their early to mid 20s when they earn the scholarships.

Bad Heart Bull had just turned 30, which she said only increased her gratitude.

MCCA.COM JUL.AUG.2016 D I V E R S I T Y

& T H E B A R 21

FINDING THE CLASS OF 2008

Otunwe, was located at Lake Calhoun until they were exiled in the Dakota War of 1862.

“We were appointed by different park board members who didn’t even know we were sisters,” Carly said. “We wanted to be on the committee because we wanted to bring different voices to the table than those you regularly see at these types of things.”

The sisters are lobbying for the restoration of Lake Calhoun’s original name—Bde Maka Ska—to recognize their ancestors. The process has proven to be an uphill battle, all the more reason Bad Heart Bull plans to continue her advocacy work, especially in the foundation arena.

“There’s a lack of Native representation on foundation staff and board rosters, and I want to continue to help them better serve the communities that benefit the most from their resources and help,” she said. “I think a lot of foundations would like to do a better job of serving these communities; they just don’t know how. They don’t have relationships with native communities or know how to even approach these communities. I see myself as a connector in that sense because I straddle both worlds. I can help and make a difference for my community.” ■ GLENN COOK (glenncook117@gmail.com) is a freelance writer and photographer who lives in Northern Virginia.

The 2008 recipients of the Minority Corporate Counsel Association’s LMJ Scholarship have gone on to varied careers in the corporate, government and nonprofit worlds.

Here is an update on the class and what they are doing now: ■■Ryan Chapoteau is an associate with

the Sedgwick Law Firm in New York City, where he works in the litigation, labor and employment, and insurance practices.

■■Nakeena Covington Taylor is corpo-

rate counsel for Pandora in Oakland, Calif., where she supports the product and advertising teams.

■■Bryant Hall is an associate with Wil-

liams & Connolly LLP in Washington, D.C.

■■David Hao is dean of academic success

and an assistant professor at Houston Baptist University.

■■Uchenna J. Ibekwe is vice president of

fixed income, currencies and commodities at Citi in New York City.

■■Sakisha Jackson works in the legal

and compliance divisions for The Carlyle Group in Washington, D.C.

■■Joshua Johnson is a staff attorney

at the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, where he practices litigating

eviction cases on behalf of no-to-low income clients in the Eviction Defense Center.

■■Cesar Juarez is an attorney at the

Goosmann Law Firm in Sioux Falls, S.D.

■■Tam Mai Ma is policy counsel at Health

Access California in Sacramento, where she represents health care consumers in the legislature and before administrative and regulatory entities.

■■Jeffrey Peterson is an associate in the

litigation group at AterWynne LLP in Portland, where he focuses on director and officer liability, shareholder actions, employment litigation, environmental law and business disputes.

■■Carmen Jo Rejda-Ponce is an associ-

ate at Germer PLLC in Houston, where she focuses on labor and employment litigation.

■■Annery Pulgar Alfonso is an assistant

county attorney in the Miami-Dade County Federal Litigation section, where she defends the county and its

22 D I V E R S I T Y & T H E B A R JUL.AUG.2016 MCCA.COM

employees in civil rights cases dealing with municipal liability, qualified immunity, and First Amendment issues.

■■Brenda Robles works as a foreign

service officer at USAID, where she currently is assigned to Moszambique International Affairs.

■■Alexander Simpson is legal counsel at

HIS in Southfield, Mich.

■■Lori Taylor is an associate and busi-

ness litigation lawyer with Foley & Lardner LLP. She is a member of the firm’s Business Litigation & Dispute Resolution Practice.

■■Fatiah Touray is assistant dean for In-

ternational and Diversity Advising and director of the Academic Achievement Program at New York University.

■■Feather Moy-Welsh is an associate at

Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP in Los Angeles.

Details about the LMJ Scholarship Program can be found at www.mcca. com/scholarships.

PROFILE IN PERSEVERANCE | BY TOM CALARCO

Attorney David Choi: Attention to Detail YUWOON “DAVID” CHOI has come a long way to achieve success as senior attorney for The Common Good Institute in Brooklyn, New York. Born in Seoul, the capital of South Korea, he also spent part of his childhood in Singapore.

It was there he was diagnosed with muscular dystrophy, an incurable genetic condition that causes progressive weakening of the muscles.

“It’s different from an accident,” he said, explaining how he has coped with his condition. “There are no medications, and the goal is to minimize the progression and stabilize it. You do physical therapy to keep your bones strong.”

As a child, Choi attended Dover Court International School in Singapore where he learned his impeccable English, and obtained a strong educational foundation.

“I had a great time,” said Choi, whose father worked for Samsung and had been transferred to Sin-

Korea. It was a difficult time for him. English had become his first language, and his mother worked with him to improve his Korean.

Nevertheless his grades suffered.

He also had questions about his future.

“As a teenager, I was wondering what I was going to do with my disability and what I could do to become successful and make an impact in society,” he said.

During this time he saw a documentary about Alexander Jeong, a law student who had been involved

Impressed by the power and authority of the law, he began to consider the legal profession as a career, and buoyed by the success of Judge Jeong, he saw it as something attainable. gapore. “My classmates were from fifty different countries, and we all had similar backgrounds with parents working for international corporations.”

It also was an “eye-opening experience” coming from a more homogenous society in Korea.

By the age of 13, he had become wheelchair bound and his father had been transferred back to South

24 D I V E R S I T Y & T H E B A R JUL.AUG.2016 MCCA.COM

in an auto accident that left him a quadriplegic, and who overcame his tragedy to become an attorney and is now a judge.

“What struck me most was his confidence,” Choi said.

Impressed by the power and authority of the law, he began to consider the legal profession as a career, and buoyed by the success of Judge Jeong, he saw it as some-

thing attainable. Choi’s parents also were concerned about David’s future and because Korea is less accommodating for those with disabilities, they decided they needed to move.

“Korea has come a long way since I was growing up. They now have laws designed to promote access, but they have a different perception of disability. They don’t view you as someone who can really contribute to society. Here, we ask how we can assist you to accomplish your goals. In Korea, they pity you and only will try to help lessen your pain, not help you make progress,” Choi said.

Choi’s family had planned to move to Australia, and his father was going to start a business there when he received a transfer to New York. It was a stroke of luck for his family.

“I’ve always been a hard worker because of my physical limitations, and having arrived at this land of opportunity, I poured my work ethic into my studies,” he said.

It led to graduation as the salutatorian of his high school class, graduation summa cum laude with a B.A. in political science from New York University, and acceptance at Columbia Law School. His dream that had begun when he saw the film about Judge Jeong had come to fruition. Coincidentally, he learned that the judge was presiding at the Kings County Criminal Court in the New York City area and just before entering law school he called and asked for a meeting.

David Choi

“We met and chatted, and I had the opportunity to watch him presiding over a criminal proceeding.

I was inspired by the sight of him on the bench. He’s in Manhattan now, the deputy administrative judge in the New York City Criminal Court,” Choi said.

At Columbia Law, Choi was managing editor of the Journal of Law and Social Problems and worked at the Community Enterprise Clinic, which assists notfor-profit organizations and small businesses. The editing position honed his ability to pay attention to the mundane details that are so important to legal work. But it was the work at the clinic that most interested him. “That was what I liked the most at Columbia.

I wanted to try corporate law, and the clinic was the closest to it. Most importantly, it gave me the opportunity to represent actual clients as

a law student,” he said.

At the clinic, Choi gained experience in the legal matters associated with the formation and operation of not-for-profit corporations.

After graduation from law school, he joined Vinson and Elkins LLP in New York City where he practiced transactional law for three years. Earlier this year, he moved on to The Common Good Institute where he works as in-house attorney and also assists with research in government policy. For the political science major and corporate attorney, this job is a perfect fit.

“We need to change our approach to government. We have too many rules; they force government officials, teachers, doctors and other actors to operate like robots,” he said.

The endless layers of bureaucracy and state and federal require-

ments, he said, have paralyzed government and society in general.

“Our goal at Common Good is to cut the red tape but at the same time not to deregulate. We need a different kind of regulatory system.

We still need to prevent things like pollution but we don’t need rules to prescribe minutia. We want people to be able to use their judgment, their common sense.”

Not only do too many rules stifle innovation and creativity, he said, but they allow bad actors to take advantage and bully others.

Choi is a man whose work focuses on the details and uses them to develop more efficient solutions.

But it has long been part of his life, the means through which he has been able to cope with his condition and become a success.

“When you have a disability,you have to be smart, you have to plan ahead. For me to get from point A to point B is not always so simple.

I have more things to think about, additional obstacles to account for [like wheelchair access]. Because I have to come up with solutions in my own personal life that most people take for granted, I can apply this to my professional life and work to find effective solutions.

This solutions-oriented outlook has caused me to be more mentally alert and become a better attorney,” he said. ■ TOM CALARCO (tomcalwriter@yahoo. com) based in Loveland, Ohio, is a freelance writer and author of seven books on the Underground Railroad.

MCCA.COM JUL.AUG.2016 D I V E R S I T Y

& T H E B A R 25

DIVERSITY NEWS

BY GINA SHISHIMA

We Can’t Do It without You! LACK OF DIVERSITY AT LAW FIRMS is getting some national attention, thanks to general counsel who have been vocal and candid about the issue.

A Law360 report from the New York City Bar Association’s inaugural Diversity & Inclusion Forum opened with the warning, “Corporate legal leaders should commit ‘visible hangings’ of firms that fail to promote lawyer diversity, and send the rest of BigLaw a message that ‘lip service won’t cut it anymore.’”

We’ve heard about GCs firing law firms that don’t take diversity seriously. An article in The Texas Lawbook warned that law firms better pay attention to Xerox’ General Counsel and Secretary Don Liu. “There is no excuse. None,” Mr. Liu said after learning that the Dallas Bar Diversity Task Force had just issued its annual report card grading DFW law firms. The report graded firms in several categories, including minority attorney representation and their efforts to recruit, retain and promote

26 D I V E R S I T Y & T H E B A R JUL.AUG.2016 MCCA.COM

minority, women and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) lawyers. Not a single law firm passed. None even came close. Mr. Liu requires law firms to report diversity numbers to his team to see how committed they are to the issue. Mr. Liu fired a law firm that was getting $1 million a year in business from Xerox when “this particular law firm didn’t even respond to our diversity inquiry.

We warned this law firm and they just blew us off. So, we have blown them off.” Mr. Liu is also a former

MCCA Board Member. We hear you, and we’re taking this issue seriously. We like the provocative commentary. It brings attention to the subject of equity imbalance that we have been working on since before it became politically correct. Even though we realize the GCs are criticizing law firms, we also appreciate the commitment that in-house lawyers are showing to diversity. There are a good number of lawyers within law firms who share this commitment.

Unfortunately, we haven’t seen this translate to the results we want— yet. We’ve found we need help, and we’re not afraid to ask for it.

We work closely with our clients on this issue because we know that this is the way to increase diversity at all levels. Like other law firms, we’ve discussed making the business case to those colleagues

who may not be as actively involved in diversity efforts at their firms. However, we have found that the most significant way to get them on board and more committed to diversity is by action rather than through a PowerPoint presentation. Dell acknowledged our efforts and presented us with the 2015 Dell Legal Diversity Award for the many diversity initiatives we have established in our firm.

“The Dell legal team believes that, in addition to providing outstanding legal support for our clients, we also help our company grow and thrive by supporting efforts to increase diversity and give back to the community,” said Rich Rothberg, senior vice president, general counsel and secretary for Dell. “2015 marks the fifth year of the Dell Legal Diversity Award, and I was pleased to honor this year’s recipient, Norton Rose Fulbright.”

Dell is also considering us as its Global Law Firm. More than 20 meetings with diverse lawyers have been set up in over 10 firm areas. Dell’s commitment to helping our diverse lawyers succeed has had a positive impact on our firm culture. Many of the lawyers who haven’t been involved in diversity efforts in the past are now more supportive.

Several of our top corporate clients are dedicated to diversity and know that it is a factor in helping their law firms flourish.

We are currently developing an innovative program to increase the conversation around diversity and advance the careers of diverse lawyers. In this Lawyer Matchup program, Norton Rose Fulbright lawyers will be matched 1:1 with in-house lawyers by firm area. One lawyer in each pair will be a diverse individual. In several interactions over the course of a year, the lawyers will be encouraged to get to know one another and establish strong working relationships. It is our hope that, through this experience, invisible barriers and

unconscious biases will begin to fall away.

Another goal of the program is to educate in-house lawyers and outside counsel about ways we can enhance each other’s careers. In-house lawyers have the authority to work with diverse outside counsel but often don’t. Instead, they tend to reach out to the most senior lawyer they know, who will get the origination credit. This stagnates other lawyers’ careers—particularly the diverse lawyers, who are most often overlooked. Lawyers are beginning to understand that unconscious bias

that all law firms should create stretch goals to correct diversity imbalance in the workplace. We are proud to have 43 percent female associates and 23 percent female partners at our firm, which is six percent higher than the industry average.

We also have 29 percent women serving on our management committee and 36 percent on our partners committee. To set the bar even higher, we have made a global commitment to advance women by setting a target of 30 percent female equity partners and 30 percent women

Dell’s commitment to helping our diverse lawyers succeed has had a positive impact on our firm culture. Many of the lawyers who haven’t been involved in diversity efforts in the past are now more supportive. figures into the choices they make every day. There are many female and minority lawyers who simply need someone to give them a chance. This is where in-house counsel can play a significant role.

Bar associations and corporate counsel programs play an important part in bringing clients and law firms together to further diversity. The California and Texas Minority Counsel Programs facilitate their mission of promoting diversity in the legal profession through direct interviews at annual business conferences in which diverse lawyers interview with companies seeking to increase their pool of diverse outside counsel to consider for potential legal work. These one-on-one meetings can lead to long-term relationships. The efforts of Leadership Council on Legal Diversity should also be applauded, as it has created innovative programming and methods to increase diversity that firms and legal departments can and should implement.

We admire these efforts and believe

in leadership positions by the year 2020.

This commitment is one that we hope other firms will emulate.

Bringing about change in any large organization is a challenge. Outside counsel need in-house counsel to work closely with them to succeed in diversity. After setting goals that will help us establish more diversity, we are starting to see some movement in our numbers. We are grateful to the clients and organizations committed to partnering with us to change the legal industry as a whole. We share your enthusiasm and vision. Most importantly, we can’t do it without you. ■ GINA SHISHIMA (gina.shishima@ nortonrosefulbright.com) is formerly the US Chief Diversity Officer and currently remains a member of Norton Rose Fulbright’s Diversity and Inclusion Committee as the US Head of Intellectual Property.

Her practice is in the area of patent law—both transactional and litigation—with a primary focus in the medical, biotechnology, and pharmaceutical fields.

MCCA.COM JUL.AUG.2016 D I V E R S I T Y

& T H E B A R 27

MOVERS & SHAKERS BRIGIDA BENITEZ

Steptoe & Johnson LLP Steptoe & Johnson LLP partner Brigida Benitez has been named to Latino Leaders magazine’s list of “The 25 Most Influential Hispanic Lawyers” in the United States. The list is comprised of attorneys from across a wide range of fields who have made an impact in their specific practice or their community.

Ms. Benitez is the immediate past president of the DC Bar, the second largest unified bar in the country, with more than 100,000 members worldwide. When she was installed as the 43rd president, she became the first Latina to serve in that position.

At Steptoe, Ms. Benitez focuses on complex business litigation, anti-corruption and compliance matters, and internal investigations. Ms. Benitez draws on more than 20 years of experience representing clients in high-stakes, complex litigation and arbitration matters.

Ms. Benitez is an adjunct professor at Georgetown University Law Center. She serves as vice-chair of the International Business Law Committee of the ABA Business Law Section and on the ABA Commission for Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the Profession.

A graduate of Boston College Law School and the University of Florida, Ms. Benitez has received numerous awards and honors including being named Hispanic Business magazine’s “Woman of the Year” and one of the “100 Most Influential US Hispanics.” She has been named “Latina Lawyer of the Year” by the Hispanic National Bar Association, and was recognized as a “Star of the Bar” by the Women’s Bar Association of DC.

28 D I V E R S I T Y & T H E B A R JUL.AUG.2016 MCCA.COM

LINDA JUDGE

Kilpatrick Townsend & Stocked Kilpatrick Townsend & Stocked recently added Linda Judge to the firm’s Silicon Valley office as Counsel and a member of the firm’s Mergers & Acquisitions and Securities Team. Prior to Kilpatrick Townsend, Ms. Judge served as director and corporate counsel at Affymetrix. At Affymetrix, she was responsible for a range of intellectual property related matters. She has extensive experience representing companies in simple and complex transactions in numerous industries, with an emphasis on biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, diagnostics, cleantech and medical device technologies.

Ms. Judge’s law firm experience includes work as a partner at an AmLaw 50 firm where she worked on both corporate and patent matters. She earned her JD from Santa Clara University. She received her MS in environmental chemistry from the University of California, Berkeley and her BS in chemistry and BA in biology from California State University, Sonoma.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

A. SHONN BROWN

Gruber Hurst Elrod Johansen Hail Shank LLP Noted Dallas trial attorney A. Shonn Brown of Gruber Hurst Elrod Johansen Hail Shank LLP has been named the Emerging Leader Award for the 2016 class of the SMU Dedman School of Law Distinguished Alumni. Ms. Brown earned her law degree in 1998 and her undergraduate degree from SMU in 1995.

Ms. Brown represents clients in a wide range of business sectors in disputes involving trade secrets, employment, class actions, contracts, intellectual property, board governance, product liability and personal injury claims. She enjoys an active trial practice having obtained one of the largest verdicts against a public school system for violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act; been recognized by Verdict Search for obtaining one of the top verdicts of 2014.

Additionally, she holds numerous civic and professional leadership roles. Ms. Brown is a trustee of both the Dallas Museum of Art and the Lamplighter School, and serves on the board of directors for the Dallas Women’s Foundation, the Dallas Black Dance Theatre, and Big Thought. For the past three years Ms. Brown has been named by her peers on the annual Texas Super Lawyers list and as one of “The Best Lawyers in Dallas” by D Magazine.

She currently serves as a director of the Dallas Bar Association and she co-chaired the DBA’s Equal Access to Justice Campaign, which during that year raised almost $1 million for pro bono legal services.

LINO MENDIOLA III

Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP Partner Lino Mendiola III has been selected for the 2016 Fellows Program of the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity (LCLD), a national organization made up of top legal professionals.

This unique program is designed to connect high-potential attorneys with general counsel and managing partners from preeminent organizations for year-long professional development focusing on relationship-building and leadership skills. The program employs a range of training methods and offers Fellows the opportunity to learn from top leaders in the legal field.

Mr. Mendiola is active in several community organizations. He is a member of the Board of Directors of Child, Inc., a non-profit organization that administers the federal Head Start program in Travis County, Texas. He is also a member of the Hispanic National Bar Association, the National Society of Hispanic MBAs, and is a past President of the Hispanic Bar Association of Austin.

He is a former member of the Board of Directors of A Legacy of Giving, a non-profit organization committed to teaching children about the value of philanthropy.

At Sutherland, Mr. Mendiola, with more than 20 years of experience, counsels clients in both transactional and litigation matters involving energy and regulatory law with a focus on the Texas electric energy and natural gas markets.

MCCA.COM JUL.AUG.2016 D I V E R S I T Y

& T H E B A R 29

Special Thanks to

Our 2016 Gala Sponsors

This would not have been possible without your generous support.

U N D E RW R I T E R

B E N E FA C T O R

C HA M P I O N

2 0 1 6 S T R AT E G I C S P O N S O R S

We look forward to seeing you next year at our 20th Anniversary.

For more information visit www.mcca.com/gala.

Interested in sponsoring? Go to sponsorship@mcca.com.

Call for Authors ®

Everyone has a story.

Everyone has expertise.

Let’s put those together and help you get published.

If you are interested in writing for Diversity & the Bar® or you have a story idea, please contact:

Kim Howard, CAE Editor-in-Chief kimhoward@mcca.com www. mcca.com/ dbmagazine

1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20004 202.739.5909 (P) 202.739.5999 (F)

MCCA® LAW DEPARTMENT MEMBERS The Minority Corporate Counsel Association (MCCA) acknowledges the support of the following law departments whose financial contributions have helped to advance the goal of furthering diversity in the legal profession.

2 01 6

M C CA ®

Since 1997

3M Company

Eli Lilly & Company

Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

Rosetta Stone Inc.

AARP

Emergent BioSolutions

Lifelock, Inc.

S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc.

Abercrombie & Fitch

Entergy Corporation

LifeVantage Corporation

Sara Lee Corporation

AbstoneLalley, Inc.

Estée Lauder Companies Inc.

Liquidity Services, Inc.

Scripps Networks Interactive, Inc.

Accenture LLP

Exelon Business Services Company

LPL Financial LLC

Sempra Energy

AECOM

Fannie Mae

Macy’s Inc.

Shell Oil Company

Allstate Insurance Company

Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh

ManpowerGroup

Siebert Brandford Shank & Co., LLC

Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco

Marriott International, Inc.

Sony Electronics Inc.

MassMutual Financial Group

Southeastern Freight Lines, Inc.

McDonald’s Corporation

Staples, Inc.

Medifast, Inc.

Starbucks Coffee Company

Merck & Co., Inc.

Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide

Altria Client Services American Airlines American Express Company Anthem, Inc. Ascena Retail Group, Inc. AT&T Avis Budget Group Bechtel Corporation Becton, Dickinson and Company BNY Mellon Bristol-Myers Squibb Company Capital Legal Solutions, LLC Capital One Financial Corporation

Flagstar Bank Flextronics Freddie Mac Fujitec America, Inc. Gap Inc. Genentech, Inc General Electric Company GlaxoSmithKline Goldman Sachs & Co. Google Inc.

Cargill Inc.

Graduate Management Admission Council

Carter’s, Inc.

Herbert L. Jamison & Co. LLC

CBS Corporation

Hewlett-Packard Company

Chevron Corporation

H.J. Russell & Company

Choice Hotels International, Inc.

Honda North America, Inc.

CIGNA Corporation

Honeywell International

CITGO Petroleum Corporation

HSBC Bank USA

Compass Group, The Americas

Huntington Ingalls Industries

ConAgra Foods, Inc.

IBM Corporation

Cox Communications Inc.

Ingersoll-Rand PLC

Crawford & Company

Integra Connect, LLC

Darden Restaurants, Inc.

Intel Corporation

Deere & Company

International Paper Company

Dell Inc.

JC Penney Company, Inc.

Detroit Employment Solutions Corporation

JM Family Enterprises, Inc.

DHL America Diageo North America, Inc. Dignity Health Discover Financial Services Dow Corning Corporation DTE Energy Company Duke Energy Corporation Eaton Corporation

JPMorgan Chase & Co. Johnson & Johnson Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc. KeyCorp Law School Admission Council Leading Educators Leidos Leo Burnett Company, Inc.

MetLife Inc. Microsoft Corporation MillerCoors Mondelez International Morehouse College Morgan Stanley Nabholz Construction Services National Grid

State Farm Insurance Companies Synopsys, Inc. Tessera North America, Inc. The Brookings Institution The Clorox Company The Conference Board, Inc. The Vanguard Group, Inc.

National Urban League

The Walt Disney Company

Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company

The Williams Companies, Inc. TIAA-CREF

Navistar, Inc.

Twitter, Inc.

NBC Universal

UBS Financial Services

Neighborhood Defender Service

UnitedHealth Group

New York Life Insurance Company

United Services Automobile Association “USAA”

Newegg Inc. NFM, Inc. Northrop Grumman Corporation Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited Office Depot, Inc. Pacific Gas and Electric Company Pearson, Inc. Pepco Holdings, Inc. PepsiCo Inc. Pfizer Inc. Pitney Bowes Inc. Porzio Life Sciences, LLC PPG Industries, Inc. Premier Media Inc.

United Technologies Corporation U.S. Foodservice, Inc. Verizon Communications Visa Inc. VMware Inc. Walmart Stores, Inc. Waste Management Wells Fargo & Company Wyndham Worldwide Xcel Energy Xerox Corporation Xylem Inc. Yazaki North America Inc.

Prudential Financial Quest Diagnostics Incorporated Reckitt Benckiser Inc.

For membership information, contact David Chu, MCCA’s Vice President of Membership & Development, at 202-739-5906 or membership@mcca.com.

32 D I V E R S I T Y & T H E B A R JUL.AUG.2016 MCCA.COM

MCCA® LAW FIRM AFFILIATES MCCA® acknowledges the following law firms who have joined MCCA to further advance diversity in the legal profession.

FANS 2016

Elliott Greenleaf

Leader & Berkon LLP

Machado LLP

Akerman LLP

Epstein Becker & Green PC

Lim Ruger & Kim LLP

Alchemy-Partners, PC

Faegre Baker Daniels LLP

Littler Mendelson PC

Sandberg Phoenix & von Gontard PC

Alvarez Arrieta & Diaz-Silveira LLP

Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner LLP

Loeb & Loeb LLP

Saul Ewing LLP Schiff Hardin, LLP

Fish & Richardson PC

Lowe & Associates LLC Counsellors & Advisors

Fisher & Phillips LLP

Marrero & Wydler

Seeley, Savidge, Ebert & Gourash Co., LPA

Fitzpatrick Cella Harper & Scinto

Martin & Martin, LLP

Senniger Powers LLP

Florio, Perrucci, Steinhardt & Fader, LLC

Maynard Cooper & Gale PC

Sher Garner Cahill Richter Klein & Hilbert LLC

Anderson Kill PC Archer & Greiner, PC Arent Fox LLP Arnstein & Lehr LLP Arrastia & Capote LLP Axiom Baldassare & Mara, LLC Beveridge & Diamond PC Blank Rome LLP Bond, Schoeneck & King, PLLC Bressler Amery & Ross PC Bricker & Eckler LLP Brown Law Group Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC Butler Snow LLP Calfee, Halter & Griswold LLP Cavitch, Familo & Durkin Co., LPA Cohen & Gresser LLP Cole, Scott & Kissane, PA Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP Cooley LLP Cottrell Solensky & Semple, PA Courington Kiefer & Sommers LLC Cowles & Thompson PC Cozen O’Connor Davis & Gilbert LLP DeMahy Labrador Drake Victor Rojas Cabeza (DLD Lawyers) Dickstein Shapiro LLP Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP Duane Morris LLP Dunlap Codding

Forman Watkins Krutz & Tardy, LLP Gaffney Lewis & Edwards, LLC GibbsWhitwell PLLC Goldberg Segalla LLP

McGuireWoods LLP

Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP

Miles & Stockbridge PC

Snell & Wilmer LLP

Miller Law Group Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp LLP

Griffith, Sadler & Sharp, PA

Montgomery Barnett Brown Read Hammond & Mintz LLP

Hamilton Miller & Birthisel LLP

Monty & Ramirez LLP

Harrity & Harrity, LLP

Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP

Helms & Greene LLC

Moritt Hock & Hamroff LLP

Hudson & Calleja, LLC

Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP

Hughes Roch LLP

Nixon Peaboby LLP

Husch Blackwell LLP

NOSSAMAN LLP

Ice Miller LLP

Ober Kaler Grimes & Shriver

Innis Law Group LLC

Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart PC

Irwin Fritchie Urquhart & Moore, LLC

Steptoe & Johnson LLP Steptoe & Johnson PLLC Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox, PLLC Stevens & Lee Stinson Leonard Street LLP Sughrue Mion PLLC Sullivan & Cromwell LLP Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP The Willis Law Group Thompson Coburn LLP

Patton Boggs LLP

Troutman Sanders LLP

Jackson Lewis PC

Pepper Hamilton LLP

Vinson & Elkins LLP

Jeffrey Samel & Partners

Peter Law Group

Jones Walker LLP

Phelps Dunbar LLP

Waas Campbell Rivera Johnson & Velasquez LLP

Kaufman Dolowich & Voluck LLP

Pinckney, Harris & Weidinger LLC

Kenyon & Kenyon LLP

Porzio Bromberg & Newman PC

King Branson LLC

Quarles & Brady LLP

Willenken Wilson Loh & Delgado LLP

Kirkland & Ellis LLP

Quintairos Prieto Wood & Boyer

Winston & Strawn LLP

Kramer & Amado, PC

Rivero Mestre LLP

Kumagai Law Group PC

Roig Lawyers

Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, LLP

Kumar Prabhu Patel & Banerjee

Rooney Rippie & Ratnaswamy LLP

Lam Lyn & Philip PC

Sanchez & Amador LLP

Law Office of Ricardo E. Oquendo, Esq.

Sanchez-Medina Gonzalez Quesada Lage Crespo Gomez &

Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP Wheeler Trigg O’Donnell LLP

Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP Zuber Lawler & Del Duca LLP Zupkus & Angell, PC

Potential FANs should contact David Chu, MCCA’s Vice President of Membership & Development, at 202-739-5906 or membership@mcca.com.

MCCA.COM JUL.AUG.2016 D I V E R S I T Y

& T H E B A R 33

1900

AT T O R N E Y S

|

38

L O C AT I O N S

WO R L DWI D E˚

Diversity: it’s how inclusion takes shape Most African-American Partners

The Minority Law Journal, Diversity Scorecard, 2016

Most Hispanic American Attorneys

The Minority Law Journal, Diversity Scorecard, 2016

Top 10, Number of Minority Attorneys

The Minority Law Journal, Diversity Scorecard, 2016

Top 25, Best Law Firms for Hispanic Attorneys Law360, The Minority Report, 2015

Top 30, Best Law Firms for Minority Attorneys Law360, The Minority Report, 2015

Most Inclusive Firm for Minority Women Lawyers

Chambers USA Guide, Chambers and Partners, Women in Law Awards, 2015 Greenberg Traurig is proud to support the work of diverse organizations focused on diversity and inclusion in the profession.

ALBANY | AMSTERDAM | ATLANTA | AUSTIN | BERLIN¬| BOCA RATON | BOSTON | CHICAGO | DALLAS | DELAWARE | DENVER FORT LAUDERDALE | HOUSTON | LAS VEGAS | LONDON* | LOS ANGELES | MEXICO CITY+ | MIAMI | NEW JERSEY | NEW YORK ∞

NORTHERN VIRGINIA | ORANGE COUNTY | ORLANDO | PHILADELPHIA | PHOENIX | SACRAMENTO | SAN FRANCISCO | SEOUL | SHANGHAI SILICON VALLEY | TEL AVIV^| TALLAHASSEE | TAMPA | TOKYO¤ | WARSAW~ | WASHINGTON, D.C. | WESTCHESTER COUNTY | WEST PALM BEACH

GREENBERG TR AURIG, LLP | AT TORNEYS AT L AW | WWW.GTL AW.COM Greenberg Traurig is a service mark and trade name of Greenberg Traurig, LLP and Greenberg Traurig, P.A. ©2016 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. Attorneys at Law. All rights reserved. Contact: Nikki Lewis Simon in Miami at 305.579.0500. °These numbers are subject to fluctuation. ¬Greenberg Traurig’s Berlin office is operated by Greenberg Traurig Germany, an affiliate of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. and Greenberg Traurig, LLP. *Operates as Greenberg Traurig Maher LLP. +Operates as Greenberg Traurig, S.C. ∞Operates as Greenberg Traurig LLP Foreign Legal Consultant Office. ^Operates as a branch of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Florida, USA. ¤Greenberg Traurig Tokyo Law Offices are operated by Greenberg Traurig Horitsu Jimusho, an affiliate of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. and Greenberg Traurig, LLP. ~Greenberg Traurig’s Warsaw office is operated by Greenberg Traurig Grzesiak sp.k., an affiliate of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. and Greenberg Traurig, LLP. 27717