Articles

QA Elizabeth Broderick You dont want to be a laggard on gender issues

The role as Sex Discrimination Commissioner must be very rewarding. What do you love about it?
“It’s hugely rewarding. You can be sitting 200m under the ocean in a submarine one minute and in the World Bank or camping out with Aboriginal women the next. There are not many jobs like that. And the complexity with which you deal – all the issues, particularly around gender relations, are really complex and that continues to make the job interesting – looking at the issue of women in boardrooms on Monday and then on Tuesday out at Mulawa, a women’s prison, with inmates. And the inspiring people I meet every single day – women who are working to create change in their own little community, really at the grass roots, like Aboriginal women in the Fitzroy Valley. And also that shared sense of purpose. I’ve recently spoken at the NSW policewomen’s biannual conference and I was surrounded by 500 policewomen with a real shared sense of purpose about creating change within the police force. There’s so much to love – everything really.”

Does going to those places and meeting those people give you a sense that change is occurring?
“Absolutely. And it’s those individuals or small groups of committed people who are changing the situation in their own small sphere of influence. If we were each to do that, that’s what would create wholesale change. So meeting those people is definitely inspiring. You do feel confidence. Sometimes I feel deeply saddened, though, looking at the issues of violence against women, not just in Australia. I’m on the Advisory Council on Gender and Development for the World Bank and looking at these issues across the Middle East, South America, as well as in Australia, sometimes it is deeply sad and the enormity of the issues can be a bit overwhelming. You’ve got to keep it in perspective. We can make small steps forward, lift the visibility of gender equality issues across the country and celebrate those women and men who are really creating change. All those things are important.”

You have been in your current post for five years. Which achievements during your tenure have been most rewarding for you?
“All of it’s been rewarding. There’s been some major systemic change like the introduction of a paid parental leave scheme in Australia, the changes to the ASX corporate governance, lobbying for a national plan to reduce violence against women and their children and the changes to the Sex Discrimination Act, particularly to strengthen those provisions around sexual harassment and the greater protection of men with family responsibilities under the Act. But it is also the work that I can do to support the individuals who are actually at the coalface, out there in the community, that is equally important.”

How are we going in terms of getting men to engage in the gender debate?
“I’m really excited about it. When I convened the original Male Champions of Change group about two years ago I’d come to a position where I’d always thought women championing these positions was important, and it absolutely is. But actually it’s about men taking the message of why we need gender equality, why we need women at leadership level, to other men that’s going to create the change. Off the back of that was the idea of bringing together a group of really influential men in Australia who other men would look up to and engage with. It’s gone well. We started with a small group of corporate CEOs from iconic companies like Qantas, Woolworths, CBA and ANZ. They’ve now broadened it out and brought in the head of the Army, the head of the Prime Minister’s department, head of Treasury, head of KPMG. Where I’m seeing the greatest transformation is at the intersection of different disciplines. You bring the head of Army together with the head of IBM and that’s where the innovative solutions come about. They’re both looking at flexibility, they both care deeply about it and that’s where the conversations are very interesting. I think the next phase will be also about the inclusion of managing partners of law firms.”

How can you ensure that this work and talk about gender equality actually goes back to their businesses and results in real change?
“It’s really important. These Male Champions have agreed to come together not just to pursue and promote women’s leadership within their own organisations, but to be a collective voice for advocacy. And it needs to continue even when my term finishes. So what we did in the last few months is that the men have broken into three groups of eight self-directed action groups. Each is exploring in detail one topic – one’s looking at the role of a leader, another is looking at what are the game changers, and a third is looking at how you build flexibility into the DNA of organisations. There are some really bold and innovative solutions coming out. Those action groups are also supported by an implementation group, ensuring diversity specialists and people within the organisation also have carriage of promoting some of these strategies and making sure they go down to those who are most junior and vulnerable in the system. Because that’s where the change needs to happen. To rely on a junior woman to put her hand up and say ‘I’m not being paid the same as my male counterpart’ is unrealistic. What we need to do is ensure that there’s good support from the top and all the way through the organisation. The exciting thing is there’s been a number of spinoff groups in Australia … and the World Bank has groups set up in the United Kingdom, New Zealand, looking at Turkey, France – and developing countries are very interested in it as a strategy for change.”

Research has shown how important it is to have women in senior positions, has it not?
“There’s a strong business case that a greater level of gender diversity at the top is correlated with better corporate performance or organisational performance. In Australia, we never talk about the business case anymore because we’ve moved past that. But for other countries starting out to have men take the business case to other men is what’s important.”

Less encouraging is the treatment of female politicians in Australia and the tendency of the media to focus on their gender. Is that a problem?
“The thing about it, and particularly for the first female Prime Minister, is you’re breaking new ground in that role. I liken it a bit to being the first female into the infantry in the Australian Defence Force. That’s not a very comfortable place to be – firstly, the level of scrutiny on you is immense, both from men and women. Men – are you going to be as good as a male leader; women – are you going to mess it up for the rest of us. The other thing is when you are a trailblazer it’s very difficult because people have only ever seen it done one way. So it’s lonely and to succeed you require support. It’s a difficult one.”

Will the mere fact that Julia Gillard is now in that role create change in years to come?
“It will. Because there’s a whole generation who look up and say ‘I could be the leader of this country’. Up until then young women wouldn’t be able to see that. Although we don’t have a critical mass of female role models, we do have some incredibly inspiring individuals that others can look up to.”

Your time at Blake Dawson must seem a lifetime ago. Do you have a view on gender issues in law firms?
“I’m not sure that they’ve made a huge amount of progress. I think the business community is progressing more rapidly than law firms, which is a shame because we know that over 60 per cent of law graduates are female and we’ve still got only about 20 per cent of partners who are female. I have conversations with managing partners and others about this issue, because it’s a huge leakage of female talent. It has a cost not just to organisations but to the industry, and it has a cost to our country. The idea that we’re putting 50 per cent of the educated female talent in law to one side largely on the basis of gender does just not make good sense either at a national level or an organisational level. But when I talk to people about that they say it’s the business model. It’s because of time-based billing and people have to work very long hours. Yes, there is the business model issue, but as for law firms who is in control of the business model? It’s the partners of the firm. There’s much more they could do and it’s interesting to see a couple of firms come out and set what we call a target or a temporary special measure. The setting of a target itself is not really the issue – the fact is having the target there will drive innovation in the strategies that are put in place to create more women at leadership level. So it is very important.”

What do you think of quotas versus targets?
“I thought we should start with a target, but quotas should not be off the table. They should definitely be there because if we can’t fix this issue ourselves it’s sufficiently important for our country and economy that we have to have a greater intervention, which might be a mandated target. That’s the reality of it. So, yes, we’ve made some progress, particularly in the corporate world, with these targets. But if that intervention is insufficient to achieve the outcomes we all require then I think we need to look at other mechanisms, and quotas are definitely one of them. You look at the overseas experience and we’re held up as best practice in a number of different forums I’ve been to – but often the international experience was they started with targets but they didn’t deliver so they’ve moved to mandated quotas. But in law firms it is about at least setting a target and having the conversation about how to progress women’s leadership within the organisation and having a real discussion, not just the same discussion we’ve had for years.”

Time-based billing may be an issue for those engaged in legal work, but it doesn’t really explain the lack of female managing partners, does it?
“No. And that’s what the Male Champions do – they appoint women into very high-profile roles, visible roles. I think smart law firms will understand that this is a significant shift in the corporate environment in Australia and if you’re a smart law firm you want to get on board with that. You don’t want to be a laggard.”

How about work-life balance? Are organisations making progress in this area?
“Flexibility is still a significant issue. It was when I looked at the treatment of women in the Australian Defence Force. You’re the commander of a frigate and you’ve got a young family – how does that work? And we looked at a whole lot of issues around fly-in, fly-out workers. But if you were looking at the law, flexible work is actually part of strengthening the firm. We need to move away from thinking that flexibility is about being nice to women. Actually, it’s about organisational effectiveness and strengthening law firms because when that talent walks out because we can’t accommodate them in some alternative work practice, that’s a huge cost to the organisation. Where I think law firms should go with flexibility is they should focus on men and flexible work arrangements – because if senior men were working in flexible work arrangements that would lead to attitudinal change within the law firm.”

You have commented in the past that your law degree has been critical to your success. A lot of people now complete a law degree, but do not go on to practise law. What is the status of a law degree, in your opinion?
“I still think law degrees are very important. When I got my degree in 1984 you had a few options – you could go into a private law firm or into an in-house role or a community legal centre. But now a law degree can take you to so many places. It teaches you a way of thinking – the ability to analyse and muster an argument. It helps you in terms of using influence, because you can muster a convincing and logical argument. But the other thing is the practical side of it is about listening, and listening is an underrated skill or trait. That’s one thing my law degree taught me. And it connected me with a great group I still keep in contact with – from filmmakers, to law professors, to private practice, to human rights defenders, to international experts – it’s any role across the globe. And if you have even a basic understanding of the law it does help you in management of risk as well. I’m in the media quite a bit as a public figure and it’s been helpful for that – how to make sure whatever you say is a measured and considered response to the question being asked.”

You were at the forefront of technology changes in your law firm days. What do you see as the impact of social media?
“Social media is having a huge impact on gender relations as well. Most of it is really positive and good, but there are negatives as well. I see it in the area of sexual harassment – sexting and emails have been a new arena for sexual harassment. Technology now gives us the ability for impacts happening in one country to be picked up in other countries as well, both positive and negative. “

Has technology changed law firms for the better?
“Absolutely. In the delivery of service, and anywhere-anytime accessibility – there’s been so much that’s positive in the management of litigation. And in the respect that people can at some level receive online services that might be more cost-effective. The downside of some of the technologies, and not just for law firms, is that you’re contactable anytime and there’s a real blurring between work and family. Technology allowed me to run a busy practice three days a week when my kids were really little … But now there’s such a blurring that we need to use the technology in a smart way to ensure that work doesn’t always intrude on our private and other lives. That’s particularly an issue for women. I think ultimately it comes back to individuals saying I’ve got limits and making sure you stick to those for yourself and working with your team. It has to come from the top.

We’ve covered a lot of issues. Are there other points you’d like to make?
“The leakage of talent from the legal industry is preventable, but it will require some new and innovative thinking and some bold steps. Firstly, because such steps are the right thing to do; secondly, it will lead to higher-performing organisations; and, thirdly, the corporate world and dynamics in this area are shifting quickly – that is, the client base – and if you don’t believe it, your managing partner should have conversations with CEOs and particularly the Male Champions. That’s another reason law firms need to be interested in this shift.”

About this post

In our latest Q&A, Sex Discrimination Commissioner Elizabeth Broderick reflects on the lack of female partners in law firms, and how technology has been a double-edged sword for flexibility and work-life balance.The role as Sex Discrimination Commissioner must be very rewarding. What do you love about it?“It’s hugely rewarding. You can be sitting 200m under the ocean in a submarine one minute and in the World Bank or camping out with Aboriginal women the next. There are not many jobs like that. And the complexity with which you deal – all the issues, particularly around gender relations, are really complex and that continues to make the job interesting – looking at the issue of women in boardrooms on Monday and then on Tuesday out at Mulawa, a women’s prison, with inmates. And the inspiring people I meet every single day – women who are working to create change in their own little community, really at the grass roots, like Aboriginal women in the Fitzroy Valley. And also that shared sense of purpose. I’ve recently spoken at the NSW policewomen’s biannual conference and I was surrounded by 500 policewomen with a real shared sense of purpose about creating change within the police force. There’s so much to love – everything really.”Does going to those places and meeting those people give you a sense that change is occurring?“Absolutely. And it’s those individuals or small groups of committed people who are changing the situation in their own small sphere of influence. If we were each to do that, that’s what would create wholesale change. So meeting those people is definitely inspiring. You do feel confidence. Sometimes I feel deeply saddened, though, looking at the issues of violence against women, not just in Australia. I’m on the Advisory Council on Gender and Development for the World Bank and looking at these issues across the Middle East, South America, as well as in Australia, sometimes it is deeply sad and the enormity of the issues can be a bit overwhelming. You’ve got to keep it in perspective. We can make small steps forward, lift the visibility of gender equality issues across the country and celebrate those women and men who are really creating change. All those things are important.”You have been in your current post for five years. Which achievements during your tenure have been most rewarding for you?“All of it’s been rewarding. There’s been some major systemic change like the introduction of a paid parental leave scheme in Australia, the changes to the ASX corporate governance, lobbying for a national plan to reduce violence against women and their children and the changes to the Sex Discrimination Act, particularly to strengthen those provisions around sexual harassment and the greater protection of men with family responsibilities under the Act. But it is also the work that I can do to support the individuals who are actually at the coalface, out there in the community, that is equally important.”How are we going in terms of getting men to engage in the gender debate?“I’m really excited about it. When I convened the original Male Champions of Change group about two years ago I’d come to a position where I’d always thought women championing these positions was important, and it absolutely is. But actually it’s about men taking the message of why we need gender equality, why we need women at leadership level, to other men that’s going to create the change. Off the back of that was the idea of bringing together a group of really influential men in Australia who other men would look up to and engage with. It’s gone well. We started with a small group of corporate CEOs from iconic companies like Qantas, Woolworths, CBA and ANZ. They’ve now broadened it out and brought in the head of the Army, the head of the Prime Minister’s department, head of Treasury, head of KPMG. Where I’m seeing the greatest transformation is at the intersection of different disciplines. You bring the head of Army together with the head of IBM and that’s where the innovative solutions come about. They’re both looking at flexibility, they both care deeply about it and that’s where the conversations are very interesting. I think the next phase will be also about the inclusion of managing partners of law firms.”How can you ensure that this work and talk about gender equality actually goes back to their businesses and results in real change?“It’s really important. These Male Champions have agreed to come together not just to pursue and promote women’s leadership within their own organisations, but to be a collective voice for advocacy. And it needs to continue even when my term finishes. So what we did in the last few months is that the men have broken into three groups of eight self-directed action groups. Each is exploring in detail one topic – one’s looking at the role of a leader, another is looking at what are the game changers, and a third is looking at how you build flexibility into the DNA of organisations. There are some really bold and innovative solutions coming out. Those action groups are also supported by an implementation group, ensuring diversity specialists and people within the organisation also have carriage of promoting some of these strategies and making sure they go down to those who are most junior and vulnerable in the system. Because that’s where the change needs to happen. To rely on a junior woman to put her hand up and say ‘I’m not being paid the same as my male counterpart’ is unrealistic. What we need to do is ensure that there’s good support from the top and all the way through the organisation. The exciting thing is there’s been a number of spinoff groups in Australia … and the World Bank has groups set up in the United Kingdom, New Zealand, looking at Turkey, France – and developing countries are very interested in it as a strategy for change.”Research has shown how important it is to have women in senior positions, has it not?“There’s a strong business case that a greater level of gender diversity at the top is correlated with better corporate performance or organisational performance. In Australia, we never talk about the business case anymore because we’ve moved past that. But for other countries starting out to have men take the business case to other men is what’s important.”Less encouraging is the treatment of female politicians in Australia and the tendency of the media to focus on their gender. Is that a problem?“The thing about it, and particularly for the first female Prime Minister, is you’re breaking new ground in that role. I liken it a bit to being the first female into the infantry in the Australian Defence Force. That’s not a very comfortable place to be – firstly, the level of scrutiny on you is immense, both from men and women. Men – are you going to be as good as a male leader; women – are you going to mess it up for the rest of us. The other thing is when you are a trailblazer it’s very difficult because people have only ever seen it done one way. So it’s lonely and to succeed you require support. It’s a difficult one.”Will the mere fact that Julia Gillard is now in that role create change in years to come?“It will. Because there’s a whole generation who look up and say ‘I could be the leader of this country’. Up until then young women wouldn’t be able to see that. Although we don’t have a critical mass of female role models, we do have some incredibly inspiring individuals that others can look up to.”Your time at Blake Dawson must seem a lifetime ago. Do you have a view on gender issues in law firms?“I’m not sure that they’ve made a huge amount of progress. I think the business community is progressing more rapidly than law firms, which is a shame because we know that over 60 per cent of law graduates are female and we’ve still got only about 20 per cent of partners who are female. I have conversations with managing partners and others about this issue, because it’s a huge leakage of female talent. It has a cost not just to organisations but to the industry, and it has a cost to our country. The idea that we’re putting 50 per cent of the educated female talent in law to one side largely on the basis of gender does just not make good sense either at a national level or an organisational level. But when I talk to people about that they say it’s the business model. It’s because of time-based billing and people have to work very long hours. Yes, there is the business model issue, but as for law firms who is in control of the business model? It’s the partners of the firm. There’s much more they could do and it’s interesting to see a couple of firms come out and set what we call a target or a temporary special measure. The setting of a target itself is not really the issue – the fact is having the target there will drive innovation in the strategies that are put in place to create more women at leadership level. So it is very important.”What do you think of quotas versus targets?“I thought we should start with a target, but quotas should not be off the table. They should definitely be there because if we can’t fix this issue ourselves it’s sufficiently important for our country and economy that we have to have a greater intervention, which might be a mandated target. That’s the reality of it. So, yes, we’ve made some progress, particularly in the corporate world, with these targets. But if that intervention is insufficient to achieve the outcomes we all require then I think we need to look at other mechanisms, and quotas are definitely one of them. You look at the overseas experience and we’re held up as best practice in a number of different forums I’ve been to – but often the international experience was they started with targets but they didn’t deliver so they’ve moved to mandated quotas. But in law firms it is about at least setting a target and having the conversation about how to progress women’s leadership within the organisation and having a real discussion, not just the same discussion we’ve had for years.”Time-based billing may be an issue for those engaged in legal work, but it doesn’t really explain the lack of female managing partners, does it?“No. And that’s what the Male Champions do – they appoint women into very high-profile roles, visible roles. I think smart law firms will understand that this is a significant shift in the corporate environment in Australia and if you’re a smart law firm you want to get on board with that. You don’t want to be a laggard.”How about work-life balance? Are organisations making progress in this area?“Flexibility is still a significant issue. It was when I looked at the treatment of women in the Australian Defence Force. You’re the commander of a frigate and you’ve got a young family – how does that work? And we looked at a whole lot of issues around fly-in, fly-out workers. But if you were looking at the law, flexible work is actually part of strengthening the firm. We need to move away from thinking that flexibility is about being nice to women. Actually, it’s about organisational effectiveness and strengthening law firms because when that talent walks out because we can’t accommodate them in some alternative work practice, that’s a huge cost to the organisation. Where I think law firms should go with flexibility is they should focus on men and flexible work arrangements – because if senior men were working in flexible work arrangements that would lead to attitudinal change within the law firm.”You have commented in the past that your law degree has been critical to your success. A lot of people now complete a law degree, but do not go on to practise law. What is the status of a law degree, in your opinion?“I still think law degrees are very important. When I got my degree in 1984 you had a few options – you could go into a private law firm or into an in-house role or a community legal centre. But now a law degree can take you to so many places. It teaches you a way of thinking – the ability to analyse and muster an argument. It helps you in terms of using influence, because you can muster a convincing and logical argument. But the other thing is the practical side of it is about listening, and listening is an underrated skill or trait. That’s one thing my law degree taught me. And it connected me with a great group I still keep in contact with – from filmmakers, to law professors, to private practice, to human rights defenders, to international experts – it’s any role across the globe. And if you have even a basic understanding of the law it does help you in management of risk as well. I’m in the media quite a bit as a public figure and it’s been helpful for that – how to make sure whatever you say is a measured and considered response to the question being asked.”You were at the forefront of technology changes in your law firm days. What do you see as the impact of social media?“Social media is having a huge impact on gender relations as well. Most of it is really positive and good, but there are negatives as well. I see it in the area of sexual harassment – sexting and emails have been a new arena for sexual harassment. Technology now gives us the ability for impacts happening in one country to be picked up in other countries as well, both positive and negative. “Has technology changed law firms for the better?“Absolutely. In the delivery of service, and anywhere-anytime accessibility – there’s been so much that’s positive in the management of litigation. And in the respect that people can at some level receive online services that might be more cost-effective. The downside of some of the technologies, and not just for law firms, is that you’re contactable anytime and there’s a real blurring between work and family. Technology allowed me to run a busy practice three days a week when my kids were really little … But now there’s such a blurring that we need to use the technology in a smart way to ensure that work doesn’t always intrude on our private and other lives. That’s particularly an issue for women. I think ultimately it comes back to individuals saying I’ve got limits and making sure you stick to those for yourself and working with your team. It has to come from the top.We’ve covered a lot of issues. Are there other points you’d like to make?“The leakage of talent from the legal industry is preventable, but it will require some new and innovative thinking and some bold steps. Firstly, because such steps are the right thing to do; secondly, it will lead to higher-performing organisations; and, thirdly, the corporate world and dynamics in this area are shifting quickly – that is, the client base – and if you don’t believe it, your managing partner should have conversations with CEOs and particularly the Male Champions. That’s another reason law firms need to be interested in this shift.”

Search our site...

Articles

QA Elizabeth Broderick You dont want to be a laggard on gender issues

About this post

Supporting links & documents