Racial and ethnic minority representation in large U.S. law firms

Pages211-238
Published date24 September 2010
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/S1059-4337(2010)0000052010
Date24 September 2010
AuthorElizabeth H. Gorman,Fiona M. Kay
RACIAL AND ETHNIC
MINORITY REPRESENTATION
IN LARGE U.S. LAW FIRMS
Elizabeth H. Gorman and Fiona M. Kay
ABSTRACT
Although law schools have seen rising representation of diverse racial
and ethnic groups among students, minorities continue to represent
disproportionately small percentages of lawyers within large corporate
law firms. Prior research on the nature and causes of minority
underrepresentation in such firms has been sparse. In this paper, we use
data on a national sample of more than 1,300 law firm offices to examine
variation across large U.S. law firms in the representation of African-
Americans, Hispanics, and Asian-Americans. Overall, minorities are
better represented in offices located in Western states and in major
metropolitan areas; offices that are larger and affiliated with larger firms;
offices of firms with higher revenues and profits per partner; offices with
greater associate–partner leverage; and branch offices rather than
principal offices. They are equally distributed between offices with
single-tier and two-tier partnerships. Distinct patterns emerge, however,
when the three groups are considered separately and when hierarchical
rank within firms is taken into account.
Special Issue: Law Firms, Legal Culture, and Legal Practice
Studies in Law, Politics, and Society, Volume 52, 211–238
Copyright r2010 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited
All rights of reproduction in any form reserved
ISSN: 1059-4337/doi:10.1108/S1059-4337(2010)0000052010
211
Much has changed since the ‘‘golden age of the big law firm’’ (Galanter &
Palay, 1991) in the early 1960s, when a ‘‘large’’ American firm employed
40 or 50 lawyers, usually in a single office located in a major city
such as Chicago or New York City. At that time, as reported in Erwin
Smigel’s (1969) classic study, The Wall Street Lawyer, major firms explicitly
recruited and promoted lawyers who were not only white and male, but also
of Northern European descent, Protestant, and educated at Ivy League
colleges and law schools. More broad-minded firms were willing to hire
(male) Jews and Catholics, but usually would not make them partners
(Smigel, 1969, pp. 44–45, 65–67). Since then, ‘‘large’’ firms have grown to
employ hundreds or even thousands of lawyers in multiple offices across
the United States and abroad. To what extent have these dramatic changes
in law firm size and structure been matched by changes in the hiring and
retention of ethnic and racial minorities?
Although large U.S. firms have broadened their horizons to incorporate
lawyers from diverse racial and cultural backgrounds, including both
women and men, the pace of change in such firms has been slow. Since the
late 1980s, the percentage of minority law school graduates has more than
doubled, from 10% to 23%, but as of 2009 minorities still constituted only
12% of major firm lawyers (National Association for Law Placement, 2009).
Furthermore, minority representation steadily declines with increasing
hierarchical rank within major firms. In 2009, minorities accounted for
24% of summer associates, 19.7% of regular associates, and a mere 6.0% of
partners in such firms (National Association for Law Placement, 2010).
Despite the importance of this continuing underrepresentation, research
attention to the issue has been surprisingly sparse. In the case of women,
who are similarly underrepresented in major law firms, especially among
partners,
1
an extensive research literature has investigated the nature and
sources of disadvantage (e.g., Beckman & Phillips, 2005;Epstein, Saute
´,
Oglensky, & Gever, 1995;Gorman, 2005, 2006;Gorman & Kmec, 2009;
Hagan & Kay, 1995;Kay & Hagan, 2003;Noonan, Corcoran, & Courant,
2007). In contrast, we were able to locate only a handful of theoretical or
empirical studies of racial and ethnic differences in representation
and mobility in law firms (Chambliss, 1997;Chambliss & Uggen, 2000;
Garcı
´a-Lo
´pez, 2008;Kornhauser & Revesz, 1995;Sander, 2006;Wilkins,
1999;Wilkins & Gulati, 1996). Clearly, this topic is vastly understudied and
in need of investigation.
To begin to fill this gap in the research literature, we ask which kinds
of firms maintain higher and lower proportions of minorities among their
lawyers. Because so little is known on this subject, we do not attempt to test
ELIZABETH H. GORMAN AND FIONA M. KAY212

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT