The survey from legal recruiter Laurence Simons found that fewer than half of female respondents wanted to see firms introduce quotas for women at the partnership level. Overall, 47 per cent of male and female respondents said that a quota-based approach would be ineffective at boosting the number of women partners at their firm when compared to other strategies, such as promoting flexible working conditions, leadership programmes for talented women associates and retention efforts for senior lawyers. Furthermore, 19 per cent of respondents said that they would be against implementing gender quotas, even though they believed that quotas might be effective in boosting the female headcount at partnership level. Only 25 per cent of respondents supported the implementation of quotas, dropping further to 16 per cent when looking only at male respondents.

Chicken and egg

Laurence Simons global managing director Clare Simons said that the survey findings reflect an understanding that gender inequality in firms has roots in a broad set of challenges facing talented female lawyers, very few of which can be adequately addressed through quotas. ‘Gender quotas are very much chicken before the egg and to truly solve the problem of gender equality in the legal industry we need to tackle the root causes of the issue, not just tinker with the results of a dysfunctional system,’ she said. To find solutions, Ms Simons encouraged firms to create spaces for female lawyers to offer their own perspectives on the advancement obstacles they face. ‘[Let’s] learn from their experiences and apply these to future generations and create environments women want to be a part of and can excel in,’ she said.

Sources: Laurence Simons; Solicitors Journal; Australasian Lawyer