Study: Canadian Lawyers Resist Flexible Schedules
December 2006 (SmartPros) — A new study of lawyers from Canadian firms found while approximately one in four lawyers in law firms report having used a flexible work arrangement, the majority of those surveyed see it as a career limiting move.
More than half of the female lawyers surveyed believed that their use of flexible work arrangements limited their professional development and made them appear less committed to their firms, versus 21 percent of men who used the same arrangements.
In the study, based on a survey by Catalyst Canada of more than 1,400 lawyers and sponsored by 10 Canadian law firms, Catalyst focused on lawyers' experiences and perceptions of a range of available flexible work arrangements and explored lawyers' attitudes on the topic.
"The law firms who have the vision to realize that lawyers with different working styles can be just as effective as those who follow more traditional work patterns are the firms who will attract and keep the best legal talent on the street," said Deborah Gillis, Catalyst Canada Executive Director.
Among the study's key findings:
- More lawyers said they had opted for full-time rather than part-time flexible work arrangements (FWAs).
- Telecommuting and flextime were the most popular types of flexible work arrangements among lawyers. However, roughly one in three lawyers said they had chosen to work fewer hours for reduced compensation.
- Even though many lawyers report using a FWA, most still perceive them to be career limiting. Just one in five (22 per cent) said they didn't believe that a lawyer who took advantage of flexible arrangements would automatically be sent to "the B team."
- A majority of lawyers, both users and non-users, said they didn't believe that a lawyer who went on either full- or part-time FWAs could ever become partner.
- More than half of lawyers felt their firms did not adequately provide flexible work arrangements.
- Nearly three-quarters of associates said partners must be encouraged to accept that lawyers with different working styles can be effective and successful.
Lawyers who took part in the survey and subsequent focus groups were asked what must happen for the current situation to change. Their answers fell into three main categories:
- Make the business case for flexibility. Two-thirds of those surveyed said that before law firms begin to see flexible work arrangements as worthwhile and important, they need bottom-line evidence supporting their feasibility and viability.
- Work to change and expand the definition of what makes a "successful" lawyer. That means law firms, and lawyers themselves, must realize and accept that lawyers with different working styles can be just as effective as those who follow more traditional work patterns
- Change attitudes about gender, parenthood and job flexibility. Most lawyers surveyed said that a broader perspective on gender roles – i.e., that job flexibility is important to both women and men, regardless of parental status – is vital if flexible work arrangements were to be successfully implemented at their firms. Many women lawyers said flexible work arrangements will not be widely implemented until more women are hired or promoted to partnership positions where they can play a greater role in decision-making.
The study is "Beyond A Reasonable Doubt: Lawyers State Their Case on Job Flexibility" and is available at http://www.catalyst.org/files/full/BeyondReasDoubtJobFlexibility.pdf
Catalyst will be developing a supplemental online resource addressing the question: "What steps can law firms take towards providing optimal job flexibility?"
© Copyright 2006 SmartPros Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
